Nia DaCosta’s 2021 reboot-sequel of the iconic horror film ‘Candyman’ is a beautiful, yet lacking film.
Two things that keep it from really being a phenomenal film, is that the horror is overshadowed by the oversaturated message of addressing gentrification, and the writing does not tell a consistent, flowing story. The focus seems more on the message, rather than the horror story.
This flaw creates a lot of gaps to the plot, emptiness to scenes, and contradictions towards the first film. In result, the main character, Anthony McCoy, is not as compelling as he should’ve been, and the movie feels incomplete. Nonetheless, the cinematography and score is exquisite.
Spoilers ahead!
The focus is on local artist Anthony McCoy played by Yahya Abdul-Mateen II (Aquaman, Us, Watchmen). After hearing the legend of Candyman from William Burke (played by Colman Domingo) a local from the gentrified Cabrini Green neighborhood, he is mesmerized on how he can use the story to project gentrification and injustice creatively surrounding the legend.
Anthony [if you watched the 1992 original, he was the baby that was saved by Helen] spirals down a path of many truths that surround him, yet, he was a let-down being an unlikable and unfulfilling character.
From the trailer, I loved the idea that the plot would follow Anthony, but his character, as mentioned, was not compelling. Yahya’s performance was great, but the character wasn’t, and it’s sad because there was so much potential for what his character could’ve been.
Anthony had no common sense and was selfish, and his later demeanor didn’t make sense as he continued to manifest towards his destiny or…fate? It’s hard to tell whether the Candyman idea was getting to his head (especially with the festering bee sting he has), or if it was already a part of his character. Which, because it wasn’t clear, I still gave him the benefit of the doubt.
This definitely has more to do with the fact that the writing of the film was seemingly reckless and not put together thoroughly, since it was put together by three different writers: Jordan Peele, Win Rosenfeld, and Nia DaCosta.
Considering this film is centered a lot on gentrification and police brutality, it felt as if they were trying to make a statement with this movie, rather than just try to make a well-made horror film. In turn, it overshadowed what audiences wanted more out of it horror-wise.
When you take an iconic film like this and redo it to modernize and connect with the current audiences, you just can’t mess it up, and now there are these inconsistencies and things that make no sense.
Speaking of inconsistencies, what isn’t consistent to me, is the objective of Candyman and the limits of who he kills. In 1992, he was always following Helen and killing people around her, and they never even summoned him as legend goes.
Then, we get this version of Candyman (Sherman Fields played by Michael Margrove) killing people when summoned. However, when Brianna summons him in the end, he kills a bunch of cops freestyle just like Tony Todd’s Candyman did around Helen.
I understand the appeal of the vengeance of killing cops, but this could’ve been executed way better, and therefore, makes this very inconsistent with the lore of Candyman. Take the legend of Bloody Mary, for instance; everyone knows that you summon her and you’re dead. It’s as simple as that, but Candyman is obviously a whole other thing.
Though, one aspect I really liked that the film emphasizes on, is when a story is told from different perspectives throughout time. Like how a rumor gets lost through each person that hears it, because every whisper differs. A story, such as a legend, overlaps with many different takes, like when the story we heard of Helen was that she was a crazy white woman who kidnapped Anthony as a baby.
Then, we heard the true story later, told just like how it was in the original. This ties together the multiverse of having several victims in history becoming “Candyman”, and the idea is brilliant, but again, there’s parts to the lore that make no sense.
Other inconsistencies worth mentioning are, William Burke turning crazy in the end, the ending when the cops show up and shoot Anthony (but the shooting is sort of offscreen since the camera focuses on Brianna), and the subplots (such as Brianna’s past) that are introduced but never expanded on. For the most part, it gets to a certain point where scenes are abruptly out of nowhere and out-of-place.
Now, while there’s a lot of flaws, this movie still has significant beauty. The cinematography is probably the best part, as you can see glimpses of it in the trailer. The puppetry is part of that, and the storytelling through the puppetry is at least consistent and not convoluted like the film’s plot. The score is also beautiful, and Waxwork Records is selling the score on vinyl right now if you’d like to get a copy for yourself!
Overall, I was especially excited since the previous original sequels of Candyman (1922) were not good and this movie would clear the slate. Instead, there were so many missed opportunities and potential for this Candyman movie. Including a better character development of Anthony, and structure for the story, and writing to be a phenomenal horror film, but it’s still a decent and beautiful film nonetheless.
If the writing was better, the story could’ve carried the beauty of the original. It’s not terrible. It’s still enjoyable, but the bottom line is it could’ve been better.
Check out the trailer below and get your tickets or rent Candyman here!
With that said, I hope my insight has enlightened you and I’d love to talk about things horror and more! If you’d like to see more of my content or would like to contact me, you can find me on Instagram or Twitter. You may also email me at jrnw99@gmail.com if you prefer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPBH3XO8YEU&t=47s
About Post Author
