The Candyman Can

Produced by the laudable Jordan Peele and directed by upstart Nia DaCosta, the latest "Candyman" installment may conjure up mixed feelings among moviegoers

1992's Gothic horror film "Candyman" was a bit of an anomaly. As equal parts haunting love story and grisly fairy tale, the film featured an African-American lead (Tony Todd) as its beguiling ghost and largely took place in the Chicago projects. The slasher genre was on life support at that point, but its infusion of social commentary and thematic truths made it far more prescient than most of its peers. While it didn't set the box office on fire, it was a success and the character became a cult figure, particularly in Black households. There were two lackluster follow-ups and then Cabrini-Green's most infamous killer remained dormant for twenty years. This is, until he was resurrected in this latest installment, which has been categorized as a spiritual successor to the original. After being delayed over a year due to the pandemic and nearly thirty years after his debut, the horror icon has finally returned. Was it worth the wait?

Yahya Abdul-Mateen II stars as Anthony, a young artist looking to find inspiration for his next piece. After hearing about an urban legend from Troy (Nathan Stewart-Jarrett), the brother of his girlfriend and art curator Brianna (Teyonna Parris), the story sparks his interest. He tours Cabrini-Green, now gentrified, and is introduced to stories of the Candyman. The tales of violence and injustice ignite his creative fire, leading him to pour himself into his paintings. However, when people start turning up dead, Anthony begins to realize the horrific folktales may be more fact than fiction. The film also features Colman Domingo, a returning Vanessa E. Williams and is scored by musician Robert A. A. Lowe.

Candyman's return to the big screen is ultimately bittersweet. With a $25 million dollar budget, it's easily the most expensive movie in the franchise and it shows. It's filled to the brim with visually rich cinematography (done by John Guleserian) and lavish production and costuming design. It's evident DaCosta and Peele (who both share a co-writing credit along with Win Rosenfeld) have reverence for the source material. DaCosta's direction is very deliberate, Mateen II and Parris both do a dutiful job carrying the picture on their backs and Stewart-Jarrett is a standout as the comedic relief and audience surrogate. However, the film commits possibly the biggest sin a horror film can perpetrate; it's boring. It's not very scary and aside from one or two shots, the kills are edited and filmed in a way that oddly minimizes their effectiveness. There are also plot threads and turns that seem to either materialize out of thin air or disappear with little explanation. There are some excellent ideas at play throughout the story, its exploration of the Candyman mythos and its clever integration of the first film's events being shining examples. The problem is the script feels undercooked at key moments, ham-fisted during others and struggles balancing all of its elements while building tension. Too well-made to be compared to previous sequels and not frightening or socially deft enough to be classed alongside the original, 2021's "Candyman" settles as the second best installment of the series. Unfortunately, that's more an indictment of the sequels than it is praise for this film as a whole. Perhaps the film's themes will strike a chord with newer audiences, but existing fans who saw it all executed more smoothly the first time around, may find this to be rather underwhelming. C+