TLDR it was a pretty alright movie.
I'm not a FNAF superfan, or even a fan really. I saw the first movie with friends. I am aware of the games, the basic premise of at least the first game, and that there is sprawling and intentionally convoluted lore (though I don't know what it is).
I was not pointing at the screen because Things I Know were appearing. At the same time I set my expectations for a PG-13 tier horror movie where the primary audience was teens or tweens.
The movie itself was full of dumb characters, silly visuals, and plot contrivances for days. However it was never incomprehensible. I never found myself confused on what was happening or why with the plot. That might sound like a low bar to clear, but I'll get back to that.
The movie exists to be a live action themepark adaption of the games. Judging from the spurts of cheering in my audience it succeeded. As an outsider to FNAF's intricates I enjoyed this fever dream of interesting and surreal visuals delivered with nice looking effects, adequately likeable characters, and more Wayne Knight than I've seen in over a decade. It had a few too many screaming faces flying at the screen for my taste, but that comes with the territory.
I easily place FNAF2 into a woefully thin genre- it is a "gateway horror" film. The kind of movie that a child who might like horror can watch and have fun with. It sits alongside movies like Critters and The Gate. While it isn't quite as lean as those two, it comes in at a respectably tight 104 minutes.
On a whim I peaked at RottenTomatoes and was instantly reminded at the true uselessness of the site. I have never agreed with the idea of taking diverse and potentially nuanced viewpoints of individual critics and melting them down to pour into the mold of an aggregated score. The value of critics better comes from finding individual ones and learning their critical voice, so they can be used as a measuring point.
Beyond that, I looked at the score for FNAF2 which currently sits at a professional critic score of 12%. I found it interesting that The Gate is at 36% and Critters at 52%, which are higher numbers but still deeply in rotten territory.
I suspect some weighty professional critics had already made up their minds about the movie before actually watching it. Perhaps many a highbrow art connoisseur wants to avoid be seen enjoying a lowbrow film for dum dums. I read more than one FNAF2 review calling the plot impossible or hard to follow. I am just a simple person and had no trouble following it. I am not making the "just turn off your brain" argument, but more that a movie should be approached on its own wavelength. Perhaps all the techno-babble about "wireless remote control" was simply beyond the grasp of these intellectual giants.
I saw a complaint from a critic that this movie didn't really go deep enough into the trauma and psychology of the main characters. It's a movie made for tweens and they aren't watching it for a cerebral dive. Not every movie can be Friday The 13th Part 2 with Amy Steel playing Jason's mom.
