Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 rewards fans but leaves new viewers behind

When I laid down to watch Five Nights at Freddy’s 2, I was already hoping to be hit with nostalgia and niche references. But part of me also knew that this probably wouldn’t be a movie I could share with other members of my family less familiar with this particular fictional world. 

Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 leans into the game’s lore and familiar mechanics. For longtime fans, it can feel rewarding. The movie clearly knows its audience and is not afraid to show it. But for viewers who are new to the franchise, this approach can be confusing and, at times, frustrating. The sequel feels more confident and packed with references; it raises a bigger question: does it actually work as a standalone horror movie, or does it only function if you already know the games? 

The movie does not take much time to explain its world. The movie drops the audience straight into unfamiliar territory and expects them to keep up. Characters rarely stop to explain how things work, and scenes move extremely quickly from one moment to the next. If you have played the FNAF games made by Scott Cawthon, this feels intentional. You already know the rules; if not, it can feel like you missed an important conversation before the movie even started. 

This becomes noticeable in scenes that mirror gameplay mechanics. One moment in particular involves Josh Hutcherson’s “Mike Schmidt” surviving by using a Freddy mask because the toy animatronics have facial recognition; this is a direct reference to the second Five Nights at Freddy’s, where there are no doors and timing is everything, and almost everything else from the scene is from the game, even the vents, and the flashlight mimics the mechanics of the game. If you know the games, it clicks. If not, it feels rushed and a tad strange. 

That pattern shows up throughout the movie. References are obvious, and for fans, that is part of the fun. The sequel feels more committed to the franchise than the first. At the same time, the movie often seems more interested in reminding viewers of the game than building tension in a cinematic way. Familiarity does a lot of the work that storytelling would. 

The horror itself is inconsistent. The toy animatronics look whimsical, in contrast to the withered animatronics, which were normal in the first movie, and the movie clearly wants them to feel heavy and mechanical. But they often appear out of nowhere, even though they are shown as slow and clunky, but The Marionette is exempt from this, as it, or Charlotte, can straight up possess a person. This takes away from the suspense. In the games, fear comes from waiting, listening, watching cameras, and knowing something is getting closer. In the movie, that buildup is somewhat skipped. Jump scares happen, but they don’t linger. Several scenes feel like they are building toward something intense, only to end without much payoff. 

The acting contributes to the film’s uneven feeling. Some moments feel natural, especially when Mike is alone or responds quietly to the events around him. Josh Hutcherson performs better in smaller scenes, where his reactions are restrained and believable. However, issues happen during more significant emotional or tense moments. Scenes that should carry weight often happen too quickly, making the performances feel stiff. Characters react, but the film does not allow them the time to fully process those reactions. 

The pacing further highlights this problem. Several scenes featuring the animatronics are set up with tension but end almost immediately once an event occurs. The animatronics appear, the moment peaks, and then the scene abruptly cuts away. As a result, the actors have little opportunity to convey fear or panic. Instead of building suspense, as the games do, the movie rushes through moments that could have been more impactful if they were just a bit longer. 

After watching both movies, the second film feels more confident and more aware of its fanbase. Personally, I enjoy the fan service. I have played the games and kept up with the lore over the years and liked that they included CoryxKenshin, known for playing horror games. References like the “Har Har Song” warms my heart. People will enjoy spotting references and recognizing mechanics from the games. New viewers may struggle to stay oriented. As a result, Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 works best as a movie made for fans, rather than a horror film that stands on its own. 

If Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 needs you to already know what’s going on to feel tense, what happens when the next movie runs out of references to lean on? 

Cover Image: Blumhouse Productions