Who Is 'Five Nights At Freddy's 2' Really For?

Illustration by Joanne Baranga

Coming out of watching Five Nights at Freddy’s 2, I kept hearing that the film was “made for the fans”. I hate to say it, but as a long-term fan of this franchise, this movie was not made for me. Which raises the question: who is it for? Because for fans of Five Nights at Freddy’s who were drawn in by its long and deeply convoluted story, this sequel does not feel like it is speaking to us at all.

That said, there is no denying that Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 is a film made with care. On a purely technical level, it’s stunning and the film excels in its visuals. The collaboration with Jim Henson’s Creature Shop and commitment to practical effects once again proves to be the franchise’s strongest asset. The animatronics are made to feel alive in a way that CGI could not replicate; their movements are clunky, yes, but that's the Five Nights at Freddy’s spirit. The practical puppetry perfectly captures that unsettling stiffness that makes the characters scary in the first place.

The withered animatronics were a particular highlight for me. Withered Bonnie’s appearance stood out to me as a testament to how the decision to rely so heavily on practical effects elevates the tension in the film's sequences.

Equally as impressive is the film’s attention to detail. There are countless blink-and-you’ll-miss-it moments clearly designed for longtime fans to notice. Small lines referencing Ultimate Custom Night made me smile and the set dressing was full of subtle nods to the games. These details show a genuine affection for the franchise’s source material and its audience, reinforced by the continued involvement of Scott Cawthon in shaping the story. 

The care is visible, but despite the impressive construction, the film ultimately buckles under the weight of its own story. This meant that, unfortunately, the same devotion given to expanding the story became the film's greatest weakness.

Five Nights at Freddy’s is notorious for its labyrinthine lore, and adapting such a dense narrative into film was always going to be difficult. Books often translate more easily to film as they typically follow a single, contained, linear story within a single volume or series. Video games, however, work differently as they rely heavily on player exploration and non-linear narrative structures. This challenge becomes even more complicated when you consider Five Nights at Freddy’s exists across both games and books, all feeding into a wider story.

The first movie largely avoided this pitfall by positioning itself as a loose adaptation clearly inspired by the franchise, but not beholden to every established detail. Five Nights at Freddy’s 2, however, seems to redefine the canon rather than provide a film reinterpretation of it. While the first film established that the movies existed in their own continuity, this sequel feels as though it is attempting to rewrite fundamental aspects of the story entirely.

The handling of the Marionette is emblematic of this issue. Long-time fans will recognise that Charlotte has traditionally been framed as a guardian, guiding and protecting the other murdered children even as she pursues justice for them. While anger and grief are part of her arc, that protective drive has always been at the core of her character. Recasting her here as a more overtly vengeful, manipulative force feels fundamentally at odds with that foundation. As a result, the film undermines any emotional weight that existed and raises more questions about the film’s creative choices.

For viewers invested in the franchise's story, the changes feel alienating, which is why I struggle to understand the claim that this film was “made for the fans”. It ends up feeling disjointed, as it simultaneously tries very hard to honour past material while forcibly steering it somewhere new.

In terms of horror, the sequel makes a modest improvement over its predecessor, showing a greater willingness to genuinely unsettle the viewer. That said, much of the violence still happens off-screen, and the film's 15 rating means it never fully commits to the brutality its marketing once promised.

The restraint is understandable as Five Nights at Freddy’s is a franchise with a younger audience, but it leaves the film stuck in an awkward liminal space. Scott Cawthon created some of the scariest games of the 2010s using an incredibly simple premise, but in translating that to film, most of the fear is lost (something I would argue is essential to horror).

Perhaps the most frustrating thing about Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 is how much potential it wastes. The casting is incredibly strong: Josh Hutcherson continues to be a compelling lead as Mike Schmidt, and Piper Rubio's portrayal of Abby has become my favourite performance of the series. The film also brought together horror veterans Skeet Ulrich and Matthew Lillard as business partners Henry Emily and William Afton, their first time performing in the same movie since Scream (1996). Ulrich’s performance in particular, as a grieving father desperately seeking answers about his daughter’s death, suggests the franchise is capable of real emotional depth. Nevertheless, the script repeatedly circles itself and leans heavily on happy and sentimental resolutions that feel entirely out of place for a horror franchise.

It is difficult not to view the film as a missed opportunity. With Blumhouse Productions behind the project, a studio capable of producing genuinely unsettling horror, the decision to play things so safely feels especially disappointing. 

Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 is a film full of contrasts. Visually, it is everything fans could hope for: lovingly crafted and beautifully performed animatronics brought to life with care. Narratively, however, it falls apart, particularly for those who know the story inside and out.

Which brings me back to my original question: who is this film really for?

For newcomers, it is an accessible, visually impressive but narratively mediocre introduction to the franchise. For hardcore fans, it seems to be a well-intentioned adaptation that ended up more as a complete reinvention of the Five Nights at Freddy’s story. And that is why I cannot say Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 was a film “made for the fans”.

---

Edited by Lara Walsh, Co-Film & TV Editor