Watch candyman 2022 online free gomovies

What's happening?

Synopsis

After witnessing a bizarre, traumatic incident involving a patient, Dr. Rose Cotter starts experiencing frightening occurrences that she can’t explain. As an overwhelming terror begins taking over her life, Rose must confront her troubling past in order to survive and escape her horrifying new reality.

Original title Smile

IMDb Rating N/A N/A votes

Candyman 1992

720p

IMDb: 6.6

1992

99 min

The Candyman, a murderous soul with a hook for a hand, is accidentally summoned to reality by a skeptic grad student researching the monster’s myth.

Country: United Kingdom, United States

Genre: Drama, Horror, Thriller

Watch Movie Favorite

More details

Other formats

Reviews

1. 55% of reviews have 5 stars

2. 15% of reviews have 4 stars

3. 14% of reviews have 3 stars

4. 7% of reviews have 2 stars

5. 9% of reviews have 1 stars

Top reviews from the United States

CallaReviewed in the United States on September 30, 2021

4.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

I will say I loved the first candyman movies and I read the short story that they made the original movie from.
This Film:
The acting was very good and authentic.
Relatable.
While I did like Troy the brother, one of my fav characters I felt like he played too much into gay black male stereotypes and I would like to see a wider range of black gay male characters in film in general.

Random Thoughts:
I will say I don't understand why they went this route with the franchise. Was it to be able to produce more with different characters as candyman?
Will we eventually get a movie about the girlfriend?
At one scene the girlfriend had a bad dream about her dad and saw the candyman, was she psychic? I don't fully understand why that was shown. As well I don't understand why she wasn't killed but kept alive to "tell everyone". She called... Sooo she should have been killed. In the original if you called he came and killed you. It went from " be my victim" to " be my witness". Which doesnt not fit in with the original. But I'm also kind of glad he didn't kill her. Dissonance. Then the cops were killed but they didnt call him. So..what was that about? Pure revenge was never one of CM agenda. Also why was the laundry store owner such a fanatic? Why did he think CM would stop the gentrification of the area? This was a deviation that didn't mesh well.
Why did the main character body start decaying? In the before movies none of the people helen etc bodies started decomposing. I really did'nt understand this.
Tony todd only made one short appearance. I thought he would have more screentime.
The movie was set in 2019, but the clothing looks dated and the mom had cds and a cd player.???.....
I really L.O.V.E.D the original though so I may be biased about the changes.

The premise that candyman representing all black men wrongly killed seemed a far fetched storyline though, that really took away from the original premise. As I don't think it was meant to carry such a burden. This movie is akin to calling every child abuser who is killed Freddy Kruger.

I definitely do not mind race being thrown into any movie, as art reflects real life, and the legend came into being due to a man being killed for being black. Its pretty hard to discount race under those circumstances. As far as Im concerned if someone is tired of racism portrayal being in a movie they should help eliminate it, in real life. No racism = no art to portray racism. No need to portray something that doesn't exist but since it does exist it should be in art. I just dont think this was the specific movie to delve so deeply into it.

The storyline itself however was well rounded. If it had not been attached to the candyman series I would have liked this much better but in the light of its predecessor it simply isn't the same kind of film. Not bad but definitely different.

The wardrobe:
All of the main character clothing looked way to small for him. Wth happened?
I loved the girlfriend(supporting actress) atire.

The dwellings:
I really like the anesthetics of the interior designs in the movie. From the critics dwelling to the mothers to the couples. Very nice and well thought out.
So is it worth it?
Yes.
It is spooky
The acting is great
The storyline is good and engaging as a movie on its own but attached to the other candyman not well meshed. This is where I kind of get confused on how to rate this.
The cinematography was excellent. Such clear and vivid shots.
I loved the interspersed storytime stage play puppets within the movie. VERY Creative and again engaging.

6 people found this helpful

Zach GaryReviewed in the United States on May 25, 2022

3.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

First, I need to say that this movie isn't a "all white people are bad" movie. Don't believe those clowns, they're being hyper-sensitive triggered crybabies. The film does talk about gentrification quite a bit and does so in as nuanced a way as you can expect from a horror movie. When it comes to bringing race into that discussion some punches are actually pulled. Quick example: A character says "the city" instead of "white people" when discussing the topic with another character. Gentrification and displacement as themes are carried over from the original movie, so I don't see a problem there at all. At the end of the movie things get more complicated, but I'll touch on that later.

So, I thought this was going to be a remake. It's not. After I heard it was in early reports I turned out any news that popped up regarding the movie. I was pretty bummed that someone as talented as Jordan Peele was lending talents to a remake. It's more of a sequel, but not a true sequel... it's more like a stand alone movie that uses the same lore as the first move and the events of the first movie as lore. Characters do make a return, but it's not really a continuation of the story, but it is a continuation of the mythology.

As a horror movie it's just ok, but it has a higher bar to clear because of its pedigree. It's fairly gory, but the gore isn't very impactful. The kill count was largely made up of people not connected to the main characters. I could see that as being part of the point, given the mythology, but it's a big miss for me. It just served to make the scary scenes less scary due to no emotional investment. The tension building stuff didn't really work for me either and I'm not sure if it's just because I know the formula already from the previous movies or it's just not done well. I'm not clever enough to figure that out on one viewing. I think if you haven't seen the originals it could be more effective.

The story is fine for a horror movie story, but could have been cooler given the lore. In fact, everything could have been cooler given the lore. Saying it's fine might be too uncharitable... it's above average. I don't want to get into spoilers, but there's an antagonist development in act 3 that didn't work for me. I think that's where part of the "all white people are bad" thing comes from, but it's not framed like it's coming from an affirmative place, so again: those people are clowns.

The ending feels disjointed in the flow of the movie and doesn't feel like it's a perfect fit with the themes at first. It does fit, but the movie doesn't earn it. It's also poorly executed. I know movies don't need to hold our hands, but they still have to hold together and flow like a movie. That flow wasn't there for me as there was a general jerkiness throughout that just got more obvious in act 3. The ending is also probably the most triggering for crybaby reactionaries, but those guys jump at every shadow... and then cry about it.

3 people found this helpful

JPReviewed in the United States on September 11, 2022

5.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

The first Candyman is often seen as a dark romance, overcast with racial injustice, sexism, and a mix of everyday horror and supernatural horror. This is not that. At least not in the ways that the first Candyman was. So you might ask why I gave it 5 stars. This movie is a "what if". What if the first movie was centered around the community instead of the outsider. The horrors the community already experiences and the supernatural happening around it, but not to it. Where the supernatural killer obsessed with the individual is not the villain, but a victim unable to let go. A community unable to let go.

ShaLaReviewed in the United States on September 30, 2022

5.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

(1) It should be longer. (Some scenes felt cut short)

(2) Yes, it differs from the original (it's more of a remix than a remake)

(3) Yes, it has "White people bad" underlying narrative (but one could also say it has an underlying "poor me" underlying narrative.

(4) MOST IMPORTANTLY.... it's just a movie! A very good one. A very good one that you should see.

Adhlere CoffyReviewed in the United States on January 19, 2022

4.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

Film Review (spoiler free):
This film was wonderfully reimagined by writers Jordan Peele, Nia DaCosta, and Win Rosenfeld. I was surprised by the decision to continue the story and impressed by the coherence of the continuity once some of the major plot elements revealed themselves. There are very few notable discontinuities (not plot holes) and only one major area where the shift in plot is a little jarring to the attentive viewer. If you don't let the final ten minutes sit too strongly with you, then you'll be hard pressed to find missteps in this expertly crafted film. Cinematography and screen direction were absolutely wonderful. There is lots of play with reflections, framing, and hauntingly engaging distance shots that will have you rewinding just to soak in all of the visual elements that are captured in the scene. The acting is general very good with only a few scenes feeling forced resulting in the actors having to drive through some thick lines and disjointed plot elements (same areas that are jarring) Yah-ya Abdul Mateen II eats every scene. He does a masterful job of both delivering his lines such that they show character change as well as physically conveying that change.

Reaction to other reviews:
To quickly comment on other reviews talking about the "race" element. Based on several reviews flagged here I expected it to be more heavy handed than it actually was; my apologies to the guru Jordan Peele as I should've known that's not his approach to storytelling. The "race fatigue" is completely overblown and is only an indication that those "fatigued" have never bothered to pay attention to Black-centered cinema prior to 2020 and have no basis for comparison. This story builds on the original story which centered on racism when it was released in 1992; cry me a river. Furthermore the element of race isn't portrayed to be fueled by "blind and unhinged hatred" but instead uses the fact of overpolicing and use of excessive force against Black people as a vehicle for creating the torment that turns into the hauntings (again no spoilers). The cogently weaves a story that humanizes the experiences of Black folks when faced with police brutality without making the police look like rage filled bigots who are just itching to do harm to Black people. Get a grip.

joel wingReviewed in the United States on December 17, 2021

4.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

I was a huge fan of the original Candyman film so I was excited to see this version. It’s like a continuation of the story rather than a remake.

This is a movie that you have to pay attention to.

First, during the opening credits all the words are backwards. This comes from the fact that the Candyman appears in mirrors so it’s giving his perspective on the world. Very subtle but detailed touch here.

Then it tells the story of Candyman, loosely based upon the first movie, using shadow puppets. This is symbolic of how Candyman was a myth or fairytale but a dark one like the kind the Brothers Grimm created.

Next the main character Yahya Abdul-Mateen II talks about basing his next art project upon Cabrina Green, an infamous housing project in Chicago and the setting of the original, as an example of white segregation and oppression. Also like the original, racism is an issue.

These are the themes you should stay aware of throughout the movie: perspective, mythology and race. Those will help explain the origins of Candyman, how he’s seen and other elements of the story.

I really enjoyed this release but there is one thing it was missing. It never got creepy or scary. That was a big disappointment.

3 people found this helpful

J. GodsaveReviewed in the United States on August 7, 2022

5.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

I think some critics here will debate that it plays on certain tropes, most notably that white people are to blame for horrible atrocities and they are evil. This movie has great story telling and serves that purpose well. As a white guy, I found it informative and entertaining because it reminds me of what horrible things mostly white people have done to create the conditions that keep blacks oppressed in this country.

Jordan Peele does amazing work and as far as I am concerned does great justice to this genre. I think if the critics took a closer look at the movies in this genre they would notice that this film has to exist because of the predominantly white culture that takes up the market share of these stories.

Any white critic that points fingers and says this plays to tropes of good/evil and white/black should also realize that this story is told from a black cultural perspective and it is from that perspective that this movie stands on its own both in the genre and among story tellers.

One person found this helpful

Alex SmithReviewed in the United States on June 20, 2022

3.0 out of 5 stars

Verified purchase

I need to start by quoting another reviewer, because she demonstrates wholeheartedly the problem:

"How many ways can they say 'White people bad' before we simply stop giving them our money."

Yeeeeeeah, sorry bit** but there is no statute of limitations on that. You apparently gave "them" your money, however, so maybe stop crying about the decisions you made.

Racist cows aside, it was roughly 70% too much. The original Candyman, the myth and movie, had lots to work with. Jordan Peele could've easily made his point by continuing the series, expanding upon the mythos, throwing in a few dozen white deaths, and creating an antagonist (the Candyman) that we sympathized with. Instead, JP went overboard and managed to create a muddled story in the process. I get the bees, I get the hook, I get the "white people bad," but how does the candy ultimately fit in? It's a recurrent theme and yet it doesn't work with the other theme (white people bad).

The original Candyman had nothing to do with candy. He's the legend this was all built around, after all. This new iteration made candy more of a central component...except then it brought in the OG Candyman, which was predicated more on "sweet" (honey) than actual candy, so how does it all fit together??? It doesn't.

JP tried to unite the OG Candyman with his "white people bad" version, rather than creating a new entity entirely, but then he decided half way through the movie to bring OG Candyman back and the result is worlds colliding. New Candyman, with actual candy and white cops doing what they do best, combined with OG Candyman, with honey and the hook and white slave owners doing what they do best.

The legend could've been recreated with the 1950s version presented by JP or it could've been continued with the 1800s version presented by the original movie, but not both. The result is a muddled mess, heavy with the "white people bad" message but not getting the message across.