Damien: Omen II (1978)

the audience applauded

I'll tell you why so serious

A Masterpiece!

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Simple to say, this is pretty much a rehash of part one, but, yeah, it is.Sure, there's some clever ideas, deaths and good actors involved, but it's just like the first two Harry Potter movies: almost identical, despite others trying to convince you otherwise. Okay, that's not all fair (especially since the 2006 remake exists now.) It does have its moments and it's nice to see the conflict in Damien. Basically, the movie opens where the first left off in probably the best scene in the film. But, forget that, it's years later and Damien's in military school for whatever reason and the same things happen from the first movie. Only, he's growing stronger, so watch out!It's alright. Not really worth it, but hey, if you have hours to kill and LOOOVE the first one, why not?***Final thoughts: I love the fact that the actor playing Damien once played Christ in a play. Full circle, eh?

After his brother is killed in what some suspect was a moment of insanity by attempting to murder his young son, "Richard Thorne" (William Holden) and his wife "Ann Thorne" (Lee Grant ) have now accepted the responsibility of raising "Damien" (Jonathan Scott Taylor) along with his cousin of the same age named "Mark Thorne" (Lucas Donat). But as Damien gets closer to his 13th birthday strange things begin to happen to all of those who pose a threat to his rise in his uncle's multi-million dollar financial empire. Additionally, certain people just happen to appear who also have a vested interest in Damien as well—and they are more than willing to do anything necessary to ensure his rise as the Anti-Christ. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a solid sequel which greatly benefited from a few scenes depicting murder and violence toward the enemies of Damien. Again though, like its predecessor, the plot involved a couple of rather ludicrous attributes of the Anti-Christ which are not to be found in any Biblical passages or prophecies in existence. Apparently, for some odd reason the people who write scripts involving topics of this type have never read a Bible or spoken to someone who has. But that's Hollywood for you. In any case, this film still managed to keep my attention for the most part and I have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

Well, after the worldwide success of THE OMEN, a sequel was rather inevitable, wasn't it? The producers of this decided to take no chances by virtually repeating the formula of the first film, basically having a loose plot interspersed with many grisly death scenes. Things kick off promisingly with a returning Leo McKern uncovering a mural on a wall in a spooky archaeological dig in Israel - along with a statue of the Whore of Babylon, there rests Damien's face as the Antichrist. Along with a bemused (and incidentally uncredited) Ian Hendry, the old man is buried along by tons of sand and his skeleton only discovered seven years later.After that, we are introduced to a whole load of new characters who basically take the place of people in the previous film. William Holden and Lee Grant are the new parents; plus a whole load of other characters whose only inclusion seems to have been to seemingly involve as many deaths as possible. What this film lacks is creativity - whereas in the original we have nice little touches like when David Warner discovered the black marks on the photographs - here, it's virtually a barren desert of ideas. Instead, the film is weighed down by a whole load of mumbo-jumbo and many superfluous characters who bear little relation to the plot. Many minor folks are simply required to run around and warn of death and destruction before getting killed. This is a formula which repeats itself throughout the film's lengthy running time and eventually becomes tiring.Still, Jonathan Scott-Taylor invests his evil little kid with a whole lot of menace, from brooding glares to sudden bursts of activity. Taylor enjoys many scenes he is given - such as the power game between himself and a history teacher. I also like the scene where he discovers who he is, and questions his role tearfully; "why me?!" he screams. This scene seems to ask for a little sympathy for the character, although this is immediately evaporated after he begins to kill off all those who dare know his secret in violent and cruel ways.William Holden lends a touch of class as the father figure; unfortunately, though, his role is ultimately identical to that of Gregory Peck (both fathers take an incredible amount of time to discover the true identity of their son, and both act too late). I found Lee Grant to be very shrill and annoying as Damien's mother, she is a superficial character whose role is to provide a sudden twist at the end. Along the way there are loads of familiar and respected actors and actresses to give much-needed credibility to the proceedings, as well as a disappointing turn from a young Lance Henriksen whose role is to...well, do nothing as it happens.Gore fans will be happy with the various killings on offer here, the deaths are where all the creativeness lies. People are poisoned by toxic fumes and turn blue, have their eyes pecked out by crows (queasy scene here), crushed by trucks and trains, or just simply collapse and die. In the film's "highlights", an ice hockey player is swept along UNDER the ice and an unlucky doctor dies a graphic death in a lift - cut in half by a falling cable. If you've ever watched DAY OF THE DEAD then you'll have some idea of what to expect. When I first watched this film - when I was an easily-impressed 15 years of age - I thought this film was a masterpiece. Now I'm not so sure. The fat running time means that a lot of scenes are unnecessary and ultimately boring. Worth catching once if you liked the first one, but not a film that stands up to repeat viewing.

O2 is an improvement over the overrated first part; it's very well-photographed and interesting - and most importantly doesn't have any tiny "evil children" who can't act - but is bogged down by several flaws, some of which it shares with its inferior predecessor.First of all, the story unfolds in a Godless universe – or at least a world in which God is disinterested or at the very least just a passive observer, never actively participating, never helping by sending over some well-armed uber-priest who slays demons for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Unlike Satan, who makes his presence known and who swats his enemies like annoying flies, one by one. This totally unexplained and lop-sided imbalance of power between Good and Evil, between the Church and Satan's minions, is frankly quite ludicrous.This brings me to the other major flaw, directly related to the powers of Good being on vacation: the movie's increasing predictability. By the time we get to the 2nd half of the movie, the murders are so easily foreseeable (who will get killed, why and even when) that you can almost set your watch to them. This makes O2 play out almost like a cheap slasher film, at least plot-twist-wise. Yes, the killings are inventive, mostly unusual, and they are well-filmed but at some point I'd prefer to not have to know everything in advance.The general problem with the "Omen" series is that the imbalance of power between Good and Evil creates a one-sided "battle" (well, a wipe-out really) in which the outcome is a foregone conclusion. With God doing absolutely zip/zilch/nada/niente to help his obedient flock, Satan is poised to win every single time. This kind of one-sided nonsense can only be interesting to Satanist viewers, I'd imagine. Not only is this a bad way to conduct a religious-based horror film because it eliminates all elements of surprise, but it also defies logic. Surely, in a universe in which an all-powerful Divine Being is being challenged by a runaway ex-angel, that Supreme Being would make its presence also known in form of powerful priests, flying nuns, magic crucifixes and what-not. At the very least there should be some priest running around, warning everyone in Bible-speak gibberish, and being protected by God. One single priest, that's all I ask. But there is literally nobody, not even a half-dazed squirrel. How the hell did God – at least the one in this movie serial - even get to be in charge if He never helped the humans with magic powers? This is yet another logic hole, about as big as Oprah's ass.It is hence small wonder that Satan's (and later Damien's) serial-killing in O2 is so brazen, so lacking in caution, so bombastic, and so totally out in the open. Then again, why take stealthy measures when the opposition refuses to fight you? The movie is like watching John Cleese in the boxing ring against Connie Booth i.e. "a full-grown man beating the crap out of a school-girl"; it's like an adult rugby team fighting a team of kids (again the Pythons; that scene from "The Meaning Of Life"); very predictable hence a little pointless. Which is why the ending is such a boring affair; no end-twist – if we ignore that silly nonsense about Holden's wife having been a Satanist all along.But how can Lee Grant be one of Devil's disciples when she looked genuinely concerned and shocked at the old woman's death? Yes, we HAVE been cheated by the movie. Or was Lee perhaps PLAYING UP to the camera? As far as I know, characters in movies aren't supposed to know that they are being filmed hence feigning emotions for the camera for the audience's benefit is simply a moronic plot-device used by clueless writers and directors. Withholding information is one thing; but outright lying movie-goers like this sinks the movie deeper into its mud of bad logic.The set-up in "The Prophecy" series makes much more sense, hence makes for more compelling viewing. Even "The Exorcist" series involves a measure of balance, an actual power-struggle between Satan and God that ensures that stories with unpredictable plot-twists can be written, something that is quite difficult in this Satan-controlled "Omen" universe. It is hence also illogical for Satan to need SO LONG to re-gain power – when there is no visible opposition whatsoever from his adversary. This leads me to the inevitable and very logical conclusion that the Satan portrayed here is either incompetent or lazy, or both.The lush production values, the non-moronic dialogue, the good soundtrack, and the overall mood make up for some of these minus points, but there is no denying that the "Omen" series is far too linear and predictable, and that this movie is far too similar to its predecessor, with an almost identical basic plot.