Really like the original 'Candyman', itself a well done adaptation of Clive Barker's excellent source material. Find it well-made and genuinely scary with great performances from Tony Todd (terrifying) and Virginia Madsen (in a difficult role) and a goosebump-inducing score from Phillip Glass. My only real problem with 'Candyman' has always been the for my tastes tacky ending, maybe a little bias as "open"/"it's not over yet" endings can not be my cup of tea.

A type of ending that gave way for two follow-ups, of which 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh' is the first (the other being the straight to video 'Candyman Day of the Dead'). Sadly, for me and it seems many people, both are nowhere near as good with almost all the components executed the complete opposite to how they were executed in 'Candyman'. Unlike the first, don't consider either sequel good films, with 'Farewell to the Flesh' being the lesser of two evils, and don't really see much reason as to why they were made.

Lets get the good things out of the way. Liked the colourful and creepy back-drop. The score does induce a few goosebumps, even if it is derivative.

It was great to have Todd back, cannot imagine anybody else as the titular character and Todd still evokes imposing chills which is more than his somewhat wanting material deserves.

However, the rest of the acting is mediocre at best and most of it downright bad. Madsen is sorely missed here, Kelly Rowan lacks the charisma and bite to carry the film or that's how it came over to me. The characters are uninteresting and unrootable, with motivations that are either vague or illogical (both at times too). There is nothing thought-provoking about the script either, the flow is long-winded and never natural and a lot of it descends into facepalm-inducing cheese. Was really surprised that it was directed by Bill Condon, he has done some good films (particularly 'Kinsey' and even more so 'Gods and Monsters'),but there is next to none of the flair, assurance or fluency those later films had, detected an inexperienced feel throughout here.

Despite the setting coming over well, it was a surprise to find that 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh' was not straight to video because it could easily have passed for it with its elsewhere under-budgeted production values. The story is the biggest problem, the complete lack of risks and originality (basically one big re-hash with derivative elements) further adds to the constant feeling felt throughout the film "why does this exist?" Furthermore there is no tension, suspense or dread, killed by a deadeningly sluggish pace and everything being so predictable. Not only does it feel watered/dumbed down because of this lack of atmosphere, but the over-reliance of cheap-looking gore gives the film a cynical, mean-spirited edge and cheapens the atmosphere.

Concluding, even with the over-reliance of gore there is very little flesh (meaning substance or atmosphere) on display. 3/10 Bethany Cox

The Candyman legend moves on to New Orleans, and has a whole new set of victims. Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan) is a school teacher. Her father was killed by the Candyman. Her brother Ethan (William O'Leary) is wrongly accused of murders, the latest being a Candyman denial writer.

The change in setting concerns me, but New Orleans has some great potential for urban legends. It goes into the life of Daniel Robitaille a little bit more with maybe a possible way to kill him once and for all. But it's not as creepy as it needs to be. The movie lacks any tension or fear.

Kelly Rowan is playing a typical scared victim. At least she has the skills to back it up. But the atmosphere isn't up to the original. It's all a weaker version of itself. It certainly doesn't have as powerful of an ending as the original.

I think this movie is really, really underrated. OK, let's star… in the first "Candyman (1992)" you don't know if the killer was the Candyman or Helen and that was pretty great. I love that. In this one, the killer IS CANDYMAN, there isn't another explanation. The story of the man's past was well-done and the gore in this film is fantastic. There's a lot of jumps and suspense. The movie stars with a great opening, then it turns a little slow – but, it was alright: In the first one , Candyman appears at the 40 minutes of the movie – and, then, in the ending stars the slasher-gore chasing scenes. The acting was very decent, especially Tony Todd of course. He was as creepy as in the original, and Kelly Rowan was OK. Veronica Cartwright was good too, after her great performance almost 20 year before in "Alien (1979)". In every way, this was a good well-done sequel ALMOST as good as the original. It also features the great soundtrack by Phillip Glass. And it was a lot better than the stupid "Candyman: Day of the Dead (1999)" Enjoyable. 9.5/10.