by Jack Grimme, Contributing Writer
2025 is shaping up to be a stellar year for young talent Mason Thames, who has landed leading roles in three relatively popular big-screen releases. Thames’ first time drawing worldwide attention occurred this summer, when he brought beloved hero Hiccup of the How to Train Your Dragon franchise to live action. The release was met with love from some, critique from others, and apathy from a small but vocal crowd who continue to condemn live action adaptations. However, through it all, people tended to applaud Thames’ version of the dragon-riding protagonist. The young lead was engaging and expressive, and showed up for the big emotional beats that made the original endure. He is also set to make his romance debut in Forgetting You, an adaptation of a Colleen Hoover novel, alongside Mckenna Grace, another affluent, rising star.
Fittingly, the Thames’ third release of the year is a direct sequel to his breakout film, The Black Phone. The followup, Black Phone 2 (opting to drop the “The,” certainly to the delight of one Mr. Timberlake), picks up several years after high schooler Finney’s first confrontation with the infamous Grabber. The sequel brings back pretty much the entire creative team, including director Scott Derrickson, Ethan Hawke as the aforementioned antagonist, and Finney’s sister/co-lead Gwen, portrayed by Madeleine McGraw. The fact that they managed to reunite the entire core team seems to imply there was more story to be told, or they had so much fun collaborating that they had to run it back. Either option has the potential to culminate in a worthy successor.
The story opens by bringing the audience up to speed on the years that have passed since the previous film. Finney, now preferring the name Finn, is clearly still suffering from the trauma he experienced in The Grabber’s basement, manifesting in violent outbursts where he shows bullies and new kids that it isn’t wise to pick on the kid who strangled a serial killer to death. Meanwhile, Gwen is still being plagued by haunting premonitions every night. Each vision convinces her that there is more to The Grabber’s story than meets the eye. Eventually, her psychic connection points them in the direction of a Christian youth camp that might help them connect more pieces of this disparate puzzle.
The original film was enjoyed by many, myself included, but there were plenty of flaws that are pretty front and center. It is a film that revolved around young children, which obviously led to plenty of child actors. Some of the performances were impressive, but at the end of the day, you can’t really hold child actors to the same standard as their older counterparts. Some of the performances were particularly grating because of the ‘80s lingo that was squeezed into the film to build out the period piece angle. Maybe it is because I didn’t grow up with these phrases, or maybe it’s because the kids have no idea what they are saying, but many of these deliveries just felt incredibly forced and stilted. If you had that issue with the first entry, I would go into this one with similar expectations. The kids have aged a few years, so there is some clear improvement in terms of talent. But the dialogue can still feel strained and clunky, and not in a “teenagers are so awkward” kind of way. There is one scene in particular that revolves around a conversation with Jesus that led to several audible gasps and cackles in my theater. It is admittedly somewhat surface level, but undoubtedly worth a warning, because it can be nails on a chalkboard for some.
Continuing the conversation about acting, I have to bring it back to my intro. Finney is the heart and soul of this series, even if he is somewhat relegated to second fiddle here so the sister can shine. We saw him persevere through mountains of trauma and abuse in the previous film. It is believable that he would no longer be the meek, soft-spoken boy from the previous release. However, I had some issues with his characterization in this film. He seems to have completely shifted to the other end of the spectrum. Finn is now a stoic, no-nonsense protector. He is snarky, reserved, and violent. My thoughts about this transition are complicated, because ultimately, I did like his arc. The issue is that Thames just seems uncomfortable in this role. We saw a much younger version of the actor stand out in the first film due to some strong acting and believable emotion. But I just don’t think his talents are served by forcing him to bottle up all emotion and play an edgy, young Bruce Wayne type. This, paired with some of the weak dialogue I just mentioned, had me struggling to buy in at points.
So how did this movie still manage to win me over? First off, the editing here is sharp, gritty, and eye-catching. It seems like Derrickson tapped into some elements from Sinister during post-production. The opening credits sequence sets the tone perfectly. The grainy footage used to establish certain scenes as dream sequences is effective, and there are several flashbacks where we witness children being slaughtered in snowy, desolate forests. The filmmaking here is incredibly striking. It felt like Derrickson was told that you had to be careful with what you showed when kids were being killed on screen to avoid censor laws and trepidatious producers, and he expertly managed to make the scenes even more horrific by limiting the viewer’s scope during these gruesome acts of violence. These visuals are similarly complemented by the beautiful landscape where the bulk of the story is set. Shots of a sprawling lake of ice covered in a thick cloud of snow kept my eyes glued to the screen, and the sequences where they are uncovering the ice as they search the premises are so satisfying and striking due to the sharp coloring throughout.
It is impossible to think of the enormous frozen lake without thinking about the climax of the film. I have no intention of spoiling it, but can certainly use this to segue into another strength. I have no idea what the rules of the spirit world are in this franchise. Ghosts can interact with some objects, but not others. Spirits can communicate with the living world a little bit, but only when it is slightly inconvenient and incredibly vague. I think that there would be some benefit to ironing out some of the principles here just so the viewer can ground themselves a little more. However, Derrickson does manage to do some inventive action sequences with this ill-defined magic system. It harkens back to one of the original’s biggest strengths: It manages to make the confrontations so much more engaging than many horror contemporaries. Derrickson is careful not to let his films devolve into muddy chase sequences with little narrative value. Each tool Finney uses to escape and conquer the vile villain has meaning and clearly established context.
That attention to detail works its way into this script somewhat. However, this time around, Derrickson relies less on carefully established foreshadowing, and more on just letting these people do whatever they can to survive in these dreamy fight sequences. You might end up asking yourself, “Wouldn’t it be easier if The Grabber just did this?” And the answer is almost certainly yes. However, I think that the “rule of cool” (a term from the tabletop scene that says we should prioritize epic moments over rules or reality) has a place in the horror genre. I was particularly welcoming to it here for two key reasons. Firstly, the moments do end up being cool, or in a few cases, horrific, which makes more sense for the genre. It doesn’t feel cheap or formulaic; it feels like they were trying to build a moment regardless of other precedent. And most importantly, this absurd devotion to toying with the prey is absolutely in line with the villain they have established. I completely understand why The Grabber hates Finney. He had a flair for the dramatic before one of his victims became his arch-enemy. It’s dramatic and absurd, but when done right, those two concepts fuse together to make something cinematic.
There is plenty more to be said about this film. While the acting wasn’t superb, there are some standout moments, and the connection between the two kids and their father is deeply believable, regardless of a few stilted readings. I don’t love exactly how the movie plays Finn, but I did appreciate the theme and message it aims to convey with him. It is a natural extension of his story — it is just a path that doesn’t necessarily continue to prioritize the actor’s strengths. So despite some flaws and inconsistencies, I do believe that the team reunited for a reason. And I want to make a distinction that I am not saying this is a “turn your brain off” movie. There is plenty of room for the audience to creatively engage with the material on their own terms. I am just saying that you might be limiting the amount of fun you can have with this genre if you spend too much time optimizing the choices of the characters with the clear bias of hindsight.
Rating: Liked It
Black Phone 2 is currently playing in theaters
You can read more from Jack Grimme, and follow him on Bluesky and Letterboxd