Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh

Plot synopsis:
Helen Lyle, a Chicago graduate student who is researching urban legends, hears of a local legend known as the Candyman. The legend claims that Candyman can be summoned by saying his name five times while facing a mirror, whereupon he will murder the summoner with a hook jammed in the bloody stump of his right arm. She encounters two cleaning ladies who tell her about the murder of a woman named Ruthie Jean, a resident in the notorious Cabrini-Green housing project who they claim was a victim of Candyman. Helen's research turns up 25 other murders in the area similar to Ruthie Jean's. Later that evening, Helen and her friend Bernadette Walsh, skeptical of Candyman's existence, call Candyman's name into the mirror in Helen's bathroom; nothing happens.
Helen learns from Professor Philip Purcell that Candyman was the son of a slave who became prosperous after developing a system for mass-producing shoes during the Civil War. He grew up in polite society and became a well-known artist, sought after for his talent in producing portraits. After falling in love with and fathering a child with a white woman in 1890, Candyman was set upon by a lynch mob hired by his lover's father; they cut off his painting hand and replaced it with a hook. He was smeared with honey stolen from an apiary, prompting the locals to chant "Candyman" as hungry bees stung him to death. His corpse was burned in a pyre and his ashes were scattered across the area where Cabrini-Green now stands.
Helen decides to write a thesis on how the residents of Cabrini-Green use the Candyman legend to cope with the hardships of living there. Helen and Bernadette enter the housing project to visit the scene of Ruthie Jean's murder. There, they meet Anne-Marie McCoy, one of the residents, and a young boy named Jake, who tells her the disturbing story of a child who was castrated in a public restroom by Candyman. While Helen explores the run-down restroom, she is attacked by a gang leader who carries a hook and has taken the Candyman moniker as his own in order to enhance his "street cred". Helen survives the assault and is able to identify her attacker to the police, who believe him to be responsible for the killings attributed to Candyman. Then Helen tells Jake that Candyman is a made-up character no different than Dracula and therefore isn't real.
In a parking garage, Helen is confronted by the real Candyman, who explains that since Helen has discredited his legend, he must "shed innocent blood" to perpetuate belief in himself and continue his existence. Helen blacks out and wakes up in Anne-Marie's apartment, covered in blood. Anne-Marie, whose Rottweiler has been decapitated and whose baby Anthony is missing, attacks Helen; in the midst of defending herself, the police arrest Helen. Trevor, Helen's husband, bails her out of jail, but Candyman appears to Helen again and cuts her neck, causing her to bleed to the point of unconsciousness. Bernadette appears at the apartment and is murdered by Candyman, who frames Helen for the murder. Helen is sedated and placed in a psychiatric hospital.
After a month's stay at the hospital, Helen is interviewed by a psychologist in preparation for her upcoming murder trial. While restrained, Helen attempts to prove her innocence by calling Candyman. Candyman appears, kills the psychologist, and allows Helen to escape. She returns home and briefly confronts Trevor, who is now living with Stacey, one of his female undergraduate students. Helen then flees to Cabrini–Green to confront Candyman and locate Anthony, finding murals depicting Candyman's lynching. She finds Candyman in his makeshift lair and he tells Helen to surrender to him to ensure Anthony's safety. Offering Helen immortality, Candyman opens his coat to reveal a ribcage wreathed in bees and kisses her. After Candyman vanishes with Anthony, Helen finds a mural of Candyman alongside a woman (presumably the lover he fathered a child with) who happens to bear a striking resemblance to her with the "It was always you Helen," implying that Helen's the reincarnation of Candyman's lover.
Candyman promises to release Anthony if Helen helps him incite fear among Cabrini-Green's residents. However, in order to feed his own legend, Candyman reneges and attempts to immolate them all in a community bonfire when it is lit by the residents. Helen manages to save baby Anthony while Candyman is destroyed in the fire—but Helen is fatally burned and ultimately dies from her injuries. The residents, including Anne-Marie and Jake, pay their respects at Helen's funeral, with Jake tossing Candyman's hook into her grave. Afterwards, Trevor stands before a mirror in the bathroom of their former apartment, where he says Helen's name five times in grief. As a result, Helen's vengeful spirit is summoned and kills Trevor with Candyman's hook. Stacey screams in horror when she finds Trevor's body. In Candyman's lair, a new mural of Helen dressed in white and consumed by flames with her hair ablaze is seen on the far wall, showing she has now entered folklore and become a legend herself.

Tags: cult, murder, violence, flashback

Review:
I think the original Candyman is a very good horror film and builds upon the mythos of such urban legends as "Bloody Mary" and so on and so forth.
It didn't feature the best acting in the world but it was suitable and the atmosphere was very scary.The sequel, "Candyman II: Farewell to the Flesh," is as most horror sequels typically are -- inferior and less scary.
Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh is actually a good sequel to the successful original.
A good Philip Glass score – albeit one that's rehashed from the original – is the only good thing about this lacklustre sequel that's more like an endless slasher flick than the evocative and atmospheric ghost story of the first film.
Here, Candyman is given a back story (and the flashbacks are the only effective part of the production) while going after various characters who may or may not be his own descendants.This is a lifeless and vapid film, one that it's genuinely difficult to watch while keeping your eyes open.
Tony Todd, of course, is exceptional, but it takes more than a single actor to make a great film.Bill Condon later won plaudits with GODS AND MONSTERS but I found his direction here to be stultifying – and dated in the worst, mid-1990s way.
It's merely uninspired, with Candyman whittling off one character after the other, while way too much time is given to one of those awfully clichéd sub-plots about the police suspecting an entirely innocent victim of the killings.
The plot isn't entirely focused on the Candyman legend (like the original was), with the investigation leading more towards the sister finding out about her family secrets while trying to get her brother of the hook and basically the legend is woven into it.
Her brother Ethan (William O'Leary) is wrongly accused of murders, the latest being a Candyman denial writer.The change in setting concerns me, but New Orleans has some great potential for urban legends.
I didn't really rate the original Candy Man all too high, I don't think it was terrible it was just a messy clichéd horror.This came as a huge surprise to me, everything was arranged for it to achieve greatness including Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen.
I see what they were trying to accomplish, they have attempted to flesh out the mythology of the Candyman and on that front they succeed.Trouble is the movie just isn't very good, the cast are competent enough but the story is all over the place and I failed to get behind anyone let alone the protagonist.To their credit I do understand everything they tried to do with this sequel, I just think very little of it came close to target.The Good: Decent cast The Bad: Desperate use of jump scares Weirdly boring Unengaging plot Things I Learnt From This Movie: The Candymans backstory is considerably more entertaining than the movies.
Even to this day, there are people who are too frightened to say the name "Candyman" into a mirror because of the fears that the film has left with them.It should come with no surprise then, that a sequel was soon commissioned and delivered just three short years later.
"Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" is very much a highly entertaining and enjoyable sequel, building the lead villain into much more of a classic "boogeyman" figure and piling on the scares (and bodies) to new heights.
but not as fulfilling or as high-quality as you'd probably prefer.Set in New Orleans just before the city explodes with Mardi Gras fever, we follow schoolteacher Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), a young woman whose life has been shattered by the myth of the "Candyman"- her father murdered in the fashion of the mythical killer and her brother accused of murdering academic Philip Purcell (Michael Culkin in a fun-but-short-lived reprisal of his character from the original), who had written a book based on the myth and the events of the first film.
Trying to prove to herself that the urban legend of the Candyman cannot possibly be true, Annie inadvertently summons him forth, setting off a chain of events that will not only reveal his dreadful origins in shocking detail, but threaten to tear Annie's life apart, piece by piece.The thing that really throws me for a loop with this particular follow-up is just how often it seems to both hit and miss the mark in each and every scene.
i liked this follow up to the original Candyman movie.i found it entertaining and the acting is pretty good.i also liked that there was a back story that fleshed out the title character and gave him some humanity.i didn't find the movie scary and there wasn't a lot of gore,so gore hounds will be disappointed.the story itself doesn't have a lot of depth to it,other than the back story.still the movie goes along at a good clip,and it's very stylish,more so than the first one was.was it as good as the original?i think so.i don't think it was better,but it was as good.in terms of entertainment,i thought it was a good movie.if you expect to be scared,you might be disappointed here.otherwise,you might like it.for me,Candyman 2:Farewell to the Flesh is an 8/10.
Just like the first horror movies I've seen, "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" goes in deeper than the first one.
Candyman 2: Farewell to the Flesh was a great horror movie.
This sequel to the early 90s original is called Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh.
Unlike the first, don't consider either sequel good films, with 'Farewell to the Flesh' being the lesser of two evils, and don't really see much reason as to why they were made.Lets get the good things out of the way.
Was really surprised that it was directed by Bill Condon, he has done some good films (particularly 'Kinsey' and even more so 'Gods and Monsters'), but there is next to none of the flair, assurance or fluency those later films had, detected an inexperienced feel throughout here.Despite the setting coming over well, it was a surprise to find that 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh' was not straight to video because it could easily have passed for it with its elsewhere under-budgeted production values.
The story is the biggest problem, the complete lack of risks and originality (basically one big re-hash with derivative elements) further adds to the constant feeling felt throughout the film "why does this exist?" Furthermore there is no tension, suspense or dread, killed by a deadeningly sluggish pace and everything being so predictable.
No, it's not that good really if you're looking at it as a stand-alone film, but - in terms of 'horror sequels' (i.e. a set of films which get dramatically worse with each new instalment) - it's not that bad.
But, and I say again, it's a horror sequel, therefore it should probably be afforded a little more slack than most films.In the first outing we're introduced to the urban legend of 'Candyman' - a sinister figure who appears in the mirror behind you if you say his name three times.
I don't think any 'claret-lovers' should leave a viewing of 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh' feeling short-changed regarding the amount of body parts sent flying during the film's runtime!Like I say, it's not perfect, but it is a sequel to a far superior horror gem.
The only things that are really worth in this movie are the flashbacks on Candyman's origins and performance of Tony Todd, for which I need to raise my rating from objective (I think) six out of ten to7/10.
In it, he summons Candyman...and gets slayed for it.The brother of the main character- Annie (played by Kelly Rowan, who looks a helluva lot like Virginia Madsen from the first movie)- gets framed for the crime...like he was for the death of his father, at an earlier point in time.Now, his sister has summoned him to prove a point to her students.
He was killed at the same plantation that Annie was born at.She is taken through flashbacks, visualizing Candyman's origin story, that explains her connections to him, and ultimately lead to the film's conclusion.There is a nice cult style to this...but it has some really awkward parts to it- like dialogue scenes.Even Tony Todd is only half as cool in this.
It tries to achieve the epic and urban mythic qualities of the original but ends up as a formula horror pic, although Tony Todd has prescence as Candyman, and Kelly Rowan is a likable protagonist.The special effects are ghastily realistic, the production design and production values flawless, vivid characterization, and the acting again award-caliber, with special mention going to Kelly Rowan and Timothy Carhight as the main 'protagonist' couple, the little girl who brilliantly plays their lovable young daughter, and of course the always excellent Tony Todd, who turns in great performances even in weak movies and absolutely shines in something like this.
This time around the Candyman haunts New Orleans and a young, pretty teacher played by Kelly Rowan.
"Farewell to the Flesh" pretty much takes away the entire mystery-aspect, as it extendedly reveals the origin of the Candyman character.
After her brother's involvement in a savage death, a woman's search for the truth leads to a family curse involving the local legend of the Candyman and tries to stop his reign of terror in New Orleans.This turned out to have a lot of good things going for it.
In fact, apart from Tony Todd's titular character (who's even less scary here but, at least, he's intelligible), Michael Culkin's ill-fated professor is the only link to the first film.Other than the requisite gore (and Philip Glass score), again, we have a subplot involving a black child who lives in fear of the Candyman; additionally, however, we get a bit of irrelevant sleaze (this being conveniently set during Mardi Gras)!
In this first sequel to Clive Barker's 1992 masterpiece Candyman' we meet Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), an attractive young teacher who's life is suddenly turned upside down when she becomes involved with the legend of the Candyman (Tony Todd) after calling his name in the mirror following an altercation in her classroom regarding the legend.There's nothing particularly brilliant about this movie, but at the same time there is nothing particularly bad.
There are some pacing problems with the movie but generally the film plays well and, despite the odd few scenes that weren't really required, manages to remain at least fairly entertaining.Tony Todd is given more screen time in this movie than he was given the original and it helps to substantiate him as a menacing presence and figure of doom.
Kelly Rowan is great as Annie Tarrant and her interactions with Tony Todd as the Candyman are almost poetic almost like there was some type of chemistry between the two.
A very good film, good things all the time and it was a little weird sometimes, good scares and it was a very good movie, tony todd was very good as the Candyman,.
Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh (1995)** (out of 4) Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan) arrives in New Orleans to investigate why her brother (William O'Leary) has been thrown into job suspected of murder.
CANDYMAN: FAREWELL TO THE FLESH isn't a bad movie but at the same time you can't help but be highly disappointed with it.
The Candyman (Tony Todd) arrives in New Orleans and sets his sights on a young woman whose family was ruined by the immortal killer years before.So, how did this sequel come to be?
The sequel is more traditional in its approach to horror, being more of a slasher than a mood, and where Candyman was something of a myth in the first film, we now know he truly exists as a flesh and blood being.
Like the first movie, things only get interesting when Candyman is on the screen, and while he's seen more in this one then the last its still pretty crappy.There were some improvements on the original in many ways.
Also, the movie takes place in New Orleans during Mardi Gras, but this colorful setting is hardly exploited at all.So far the Candyman movies have been pretty lame, but I will probably endure "Candyman 3" because Tony Todd's creation has the potential to become a great horror icon.
She finds out that her great grandmother was the lover of Candyman and he wants her now to bring out his past.Candyman Farewell to the Flesh was an alright horror movie and the story could've worked better, but it just seemed like your typical horror sequel and it could be predictable at times.
This, coupled with the overuse of Philip Glass' score from the original to the point that the ethereal effect it had in the first film became nothing but meaningless in this one makes the film's first half decidedly mediocre.But once the story kicks in the second half & Kelly Rowan's heroine is on the chase to defeat what is essentially her ancestor, Farewell to the Flesh picks up considerably to rank as a passable sequel.
The visual effects are good, especially the ending where Tony Todd's hook-handed ghost is defeated by Rowan smashing the mirror, causing his form to shatter like glass, an effect that looks remarkable.
The first Candyman film was a great scary movie for its time, it is obvious a sequel was only made in an attempt to cash in on the success, which is easy to do with scenes containing more blood, from director Bill Condon (Gods and Monsters, Dreamgirls, The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2).
Todd is still relatively creepy with his hook for a hand and saying a couple of familiar lines in his cool voice, but the rest of the cast are naff, the origins story is relatively good to watch, and the deaths are still bloody, but it is predictable and a bit ridiculous, it is a rather pointless horror sequel.
I do admit that the film's explanation regarding the origin of Daniel Robitaille's power seemed rather silly(the idea that Candyman's soul was trapped in the mirror of his white lover Caroline due to the extremities of his torment, hate & agony for what the racist white township did to him), but the film has so many things I enjoyed that I was actually able to look past it.Annie(Kelly Rowan, many who watched THE OC might recognize her)is a schoolteacher in New Orleans whose father died at the hook of the Candyman.
I think why I enjoyed this more than I thought was the atmospheric setting(Mardi Gras, New Orleans, mostly the slums areas), the menacing Todd(an actor I'm quite fond of), the wonderful Philip Glass score, Condon's photography, and the well-staged death sequences.I won't lie to you, this is, above all, a slasher film and director Bill Condon allows Candyman to do some damage in this sequel penetrating quite a few victims through the torso with the hook bursting through the stomach, often lifting them right in the air..Condon, for added effect, often closes in on the horrified expressions of those being thrusted through.
Ethan's sister Annie (Kelly Rowan) sets out to prove her brother innocent & discover the person who killed their father who was murder in a similar way to Purcell, having said Candyman's name in a mirror five times herself he appears & starts to kill her friends & family as he has special plans for her...Directed by Bill Condon this sequel to the original Candyman (1992) was alright but nothing that special.
There's a few gore scenes, a few people are killed by Candayman with his hook although they are all virtually exactly the same & there's a flashback where Candyman has his hand cut off.Technically the film is good, it looks like it had some money behind it & it's certainly well made.
Like most horror film sequels, Candy-man: Farewell To The Flesh is vastly inferior to the original film: Candy-man.
Set in New Orleans this sequel opens with a lecture on the Candyman myth, presented by Professor Philip Purcell, who doesn't believe that he is real.
Trying to find a way to stop him she starts to look into the history of the Candyman and discovers a shocking link to her own family.This isn't as good as the original film but to my mind it is still pretty good.
Tony Todd does a great job bringing the character to life; he has a real presence and manages to be menacing and sympathetic at the same time the more we learn about Candyman's origin the more sympathetic the character becomes.
Her father was killed by Candyman, and brother wrongly accused of the murders.Instead of the usual horror film retread we get when it comes to sequels, "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" actually expands on the history of the character by visually telling his tale on screen.
Candyman sets his sight on New Orleans and goes after a school teacher (Kelly Rowan) It turns out that Annie's father was murdered by The Candyman, but nobody believed it.
"Candyman 2: Farewell To the Flesh" is a sequel to the 1992 horror film.
After saying his name five times, Annie is now the Candyman's new intended victim, and she must find a way to stop him before he takes her life.Surprisingly, this was actually a pretty well done sequel.
Tony Todd returns and is as creepy as he was in the first film, as the hook-handed monster that is the stuff nightmares are made of.As in many horror sequels, we get a bit of a back story on who the Candyman was before he became the ghostly legend that he is today.
While it may not quite live up to the original film, this is a valiant effort that turns out to be a pretty good movie overall.
So, on it's own, Candyman: Farewell to Flesh Can Be considered a good horror flick.