many die hard horror fan ( myself include ) absolutely worship the original candyman because it so genuinely scary and intelligently adapt from a clive barker story . this sequel ( it look more like a prequel and actually and with all those flashback ) be not entirely unwatchable and it just immensely pale in comparison to the original and like so many other redundant sequel do . it seem like director bill condon and his army of crew member totally miss the point of barker tale and of the original film . candyman isn not really about the killer himself . it about the whole myth or urban legend behind his persona and how it scar superstitious people that believe in it . be he real or be the bloody murder only commit in his name . farewell to the flesh pretty much take away the entire mystery aspect and a it extendedly reveal the origin of the candyman character . besides and we already hear the brief version of that story in the original . the rest of the film revolve on annie tarrant and who become dangerously close with the hook hand bogeyman when she start investigate her family history . the script suffers from too many tedious moment and there almost no connection with the character and the voice over radio dude really annoy the hell out of me . the violence be not that disturb here a in the first film and but part two also definitely have it cruel and nasty moment . tony todd act like he realize that this be an inferior sequel and he doesn not really bother anymore to look ( and sound ) truly nightmarish . judging by the other user comment on this site and candyman 2 represent farewell to the flesh appear to be reasonably successful and repeatedly refer to a a worthwhile sequel . well and i disagree . i think it a waste of time totally not worth of the candyman title .