User reviews

First of all I have to say that I never saw the original movie, so if you are here to see if this would compare to that movie, then this review might not be the one for you.

But since I write a review to every new horror movie I see, I won't make an exception for this one. I read a plot synopsis of the original one so I had some idea what the past of this movie would be. I found my way around the plot pretty quickly and it didn't take long to see how the characters worked and what type of people they were.

In the intro sequence there's a scene where a young man bashes his head against a unidirectional perspective glass in an interrogation room and the effects looked a little wonky which made me skeptical at first. However since the movie barely uses any CGI, that was the only time that I noticed flaws with the effects. The movie is written by the same writer and there are some characters coming back from the 1994 original which will definitely please some fans.

However the movie is rather slow and with almost two hours of runtime I think it really dragged. This could have been a 90-minute movie and it would be equally as enjoyable if not more. Also the movie introduces a really generic twist which felt unoriginal and lazy. I think if you are a big fan of the original movie you might get something from this sequel, however if you have never seen it like me, this movie doesn't provide much entertainment and therefore doesn't manage to stand on it's own. [5,1/10]

It is extremely smart to make a follow up to a danish cult classic almost 30 years later. You manage you capture a new audience, while reintroducing and appealing to the ones who watched it on release back in 1994.

Now this new installment feels and looks like a modernization of the first one and delves into the story years later. It manages to keep the creepyness from the first one, despite lacking the humor and the "out-there-ness" the first movie brought in its delivery and script.

The performances are great all around, but it doesn't do anything new in terms of the genre. To be honest, I personally didn't like the ending, as I felt it lacked a sense place as a lot of the problems the movie explored through its runtime, is resolved with a cliche ending.

It's a good enough movie, even if it doesn't justify its existence because of the sense of conclusion we got in the original.

A 30 year later sequel is a strange thing, but probably what's even more strange is that it took 30 years at all considering how successful the original was. I didn't even have to check if 'Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever' was made by the same writer/director as the original. I could tell by the chaotic structuring that both films possess. If you enjoyed the original then I'm sure you can at least find some enjoyment in this film.

Again, just like the first, for the first 40-50 minutes of the film I really had no idea where it was headed or what it was even about. Then out of nowhere, just like the first, it straightens the wheel and puts itself on course for a pretty entertaining and well done final hour or so.

Most of the original cast are back, which is a great effort all this time later. Considering the success Nikolaj Coster-Waldau has had in the meantime I'm a little surprised they were able to entice him, particularly considering they made his character a shell of his former self. There is one scene where he interrupts his daughter at the school that really should've been left on the cutting room floor.

In a lot of ways this is going to come across as a strange sequel. But considering how much later it is and that they were able to work the entire original cast into and still make a somewhat creepy and coherent story out of it, I think it is an impressive effort. 7/10.

It has been almost 30 years since the events of the original. Martin is kind of a wreck; he doesn't work, doesn't receive welfare and takes too many pills. His daughter Emma is trying to help, but he's very resistant to it. Neither of them have properly processed the suicide of Kalinka. So one day she does something she feels is definitely going to make it better. The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

A major theme here is the way that trauma has a ripple effect. And how something intended to improve things can actually worsen them. The terror is in part derived from this, thus making it more effective than if it truly was something as banal (at this point in genre fiction) as merely a serial killer. The mystery is compelling, and though I applied myself, I did not deduce the identity of the murderer. This has amazing cinematography and editing, which truly do hold you in a vice grip in the scariest scenes. Movies like this can get a significant boost out of credible characterization. Maria feels like a real person; she is not confined by stereotypical femininity. The acting and the chemistry is all convincing.

This features brief sexuality, a little strong bloody violence and gore, and some swearing. I recommend this to fans of Horror. 7/10.

To be totally honest.. Its a stinker. And i have a hard time figuring out why people can actually give it a good rating. A film made at this 'level' have to perfom better. It solely lives on the name.

Which sucks, because the first one is so good. Already in the beginning there is some of the worst dubbing work I've ever seen in a film, ever. The whole setup is just so bad. The pacing is off and in general the work takes you away from the movies. Not that the plot is good. The story is in general thin as paper, and you sit with that feeling that the protagonist's action is so unreal. In know we talk about a film here, but come on. Its not good, and a real disappointment.

Cant recommend.

First of, I saw the critical reviews and I had to write my own.

I'm 35 Years old now and I grew up with the original and the it gave me nightmares as a kid. The sequel is not perfect and didn't even come close to the original. But, it is a good sequel and the fact that they casted the same actors and they even filmed at the same locations, as the first movie, is something that increased my rating.

It's no multi dollar creation with hollywood in the background and they gave their best to make the movie as good as possible. The other actors were likeable even if their actions weren't understandable.

I'd recommend to watch the original first, even if you saw it already. Everyone who loves the original will be pleased with the sequel should low their expectations.

30 years later. THIRTY!

Hard to recognise Bornedal anywhere in this agonising long, hot mess of a sequel. Perhaps; "too long ago - too long apart" as an old song goes. Characters with no depth clawing their way through a script so weak it couldn't compete with an average School play. The occasional odd choice of soundtracks, all the way through feeble dialogues with the terrible decision to drop single English words in most of the characters lines were cringey and distracting as this lead to a train of thought on who in the actual fudge decided that this script including characters and lines was ready for production without anyone on board this film project objecting or showed just an ounce of disapproval.

Very sad seeing how terrible decisions ruined what could have been a great sequel to a great movie.

I saw this directly after seeing it's predecessor.

In this sequel we have Martin's daughter Emma who conveniently takes a job as a night watch in the same forensic department where her parents were traumatized by a psycho.

She finds out that the psycho is alive at a nearby asylum. She becomes obsessed to see him.

At the same time we have a copycat killer on the prowl.

The movie is very predictable but it is atmospheric n an effective thriller.

It takes more than 40 mins before the first kill.

One of the best part is that they have included many new characters, not just so that they can be killed off.

How Brent gets to get out on weekends inspite of him being a brutal killer was beyond me.

Ole Bornedal's "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" ("Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever") is a horror sequel that delivers a satisfying blend of tension, and eerie sound design. While it doesn't reach the heights of its iconic predecessor, this Danish film proves that lightning can strike twice, even if it doesn't rewrite the horror rulebook.

The original "Nightwatch" shook the local industry, proving that Danish filmmakers could craft compelling horror. Two decades later, Bornedal revisits his classic, exploring generational trauma and the weight of the past. The result is a competent, if familiar, sequel that delivers on entertainment value, even if it doesn't break free from the shadow of its iconic predecessor.

The story centers around Emma (Fanny Leander Bornedal), a young medical student drawn into a web of horror as she attempts to clear her family name. It's a tale of mistaken identity and confronting the sins of the past, with a strong performance by Bornedal, who portrays a character trying to escape their legacy.

While the film follows a similar formula to its predecessor, with familiar story beats and character types, it excels in building tension. The sound design is particularly effective, with the unnerving sound of a utility knife adding to the sense of impending danger. The film also doesn't skimp on gore, delivering plenty of bloody moments to satisfy horror enthusiasts.

However, "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" falls short of fully exploring its potential for intergenerational dialogue and commentary. It feels like a missed opportunity, as the film stops just short of delving into deeper themes, instead opting for a safer, more familiar path. This is a common pitfall of legacy sequels, and while it doesn't detract from the enjoyment of the film, it does leave you wanting more.

In conclusion, "Nattevagten - Dæmoner Går i Arv" is a solid addition to the horror genre. It effectively balances tension and gore, delivering an entertaining and satisfying experience. While it may not be the most innovative entry, it is a worthy successor to the original "Nightwatch," reminding us of its impact and proving that some formulas are worth revisiting.

So thirty years after the original they decided to make a sequel. I was curious about it as I liked the first movie. Curious to see if it is as good, as sequels often have the tendencies not to deliver. The exact same cast but thirty years later, that's also interesting. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and Kim Bodnia have been by now in a considerable amount of good movies or series. Still strange to hear them again in their original language. The story is almost a copy paste of the original, but there is still a good twist, although some might see it coming, especially if you like me just rewatched the original from 1994 first. This sequel is rated lower but to me they are both of the same level. A good entertaining Danish thriller.

Ole Bornedal's third adaptation of the material. From the debut, to the Hollywood opportunity, to the open confession of having to earn money to feed his family. Ok, at least it's honest and, in this context, the logical consequence of giving his daughter the leading role. He doesn't have many films on his CV, no absolute masterpieces, but no total failures either. And in addition to his mastery of solid film craft, he also has a little mischievous streak in his neck. I wouldn't overemphasise the citation of the purely commercial intentions; the nostalgic return of many of the contributors alone looks more like an age-related look back, perhaps a small project of the heart. Whatever the case, the location still works perfectly, but is utilised much less than hoped. The first highlight is provided by another, this one and the meeting with the killer from the original. First exciting, then tragic, then disturbing, a remarkable emotional marathon at breakneck speed. From now on, however, things become quite strange and wild, with one strange scene following another. A standard crime thriller was obviously not the aim, but something special. Whether this was successful is in the eye of the beholder. In the end, it's less straightforward than its predecessors and certainly less lasting, logically enough, but two hours of solid genre fare with plenty of thrills in the long finale. And the realisation that Kim Bodnia can neither play football nor will she be around in 2064.

Martin's (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau) daughter, Emma (Fanny Leander Bornedal, daughter of director Bornedal), takes up a night watch job to find out what happened to her parents almost thirty years ago. A meeting with Wörmer (Ulf Pilgaard) in his cell pulls the serial killer out of his coma and sets in motion a chain of fateful events. Emma, like your father 30 years before, moonlights as a nightwatchman at the city's hospital morgue, and once again a series killer is stalking the streets and the hospital. She has barely started his new job when one victim is brought in and laid out between the serried ranks of corpses. Prepare to be scared!. Se's the prime suspect in a terrifying mystery !. In the mind of the police, she's the prime suspect, in the eyes of a killer, she's the next victim !.

Inferior sequel with similar ingedients to the previous one, containing thrills, chiller, a lot of killings, twists and turns. ¨Nightwatch (Nattevagten, 1994)¨ was a classy psychological thriller, but this late sequel results to be really mediocre. Tighly scripted , with just a drop of wicked black humor, the picture delivers eerie hints of necrophilia, visceral shocks and heart-racing intrigue. There's an unconvincing parallel between ¨Nightwatch¨ and ¨Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever¨, but no getting to convince the simple viewer due to too inexplicable coincidences and unlikely happenings.

The original Danish movie ¨Nattevagten (Nightwatch)¨ (1994) had a remake and a sequel. The director of the Danish original, Ole Bornedal, also directed the remake, ¨Nightwatch¨ (1997). After the original ¨Nightwatch¨ (1994) found critical acclaim in 1994, director Ole Bornedal was hired by Dimension Films (who had recently purchased the distribution rights for Nattevagten) to come to the United States and remake the film. The remake was intended to be the first of three films Bornedal would direct for Miramax, the parent company of Dimension. The American remake starring Ewan McGregor, Nick Nolte, Erich Anderson, Josh Brolin, Lauren Graham. Thirty years later, Bornedal made the follow-up: this ¨Nightwatch: Demons Are Forever¨ (2023) or ¨Nattevagten - Dæmoner går i arv¨.

Danish writer/director Bornedal exploits the peculiarly terrifying and portentous atmosphere of a hospital mortuary to the full, accompanying the thrilling and suspenseful musical score, as well as appropriately sinister and atmospheric cinematography. The motion picture was uneven but professionally directed by Ole Bornedal, but it has nothing special compared to what we have often seen before and better. Ole has a long and successful career as Denmark as USA. Directing the American remake of his Danish hit, Nightwatch (1994). Miramax/Dimension brought him in as a co-producer on Guillermo Del Toro's first American movie, ¨Mimic¨ (1997) along with the Weinsteins and worked for a couple of years as a script supervisor. Bornedal's movies have been critically acclaimed all over the world and is acknowledged as one of the most influential creators of "The New Danish Cinema¨. He is good craftsman who has directed a few films , such as : The suspense thriller "Just Another Love Story", Sci Fi for kids: "The Substitute" and "Deliver us from Evil", ¨Dina¨, ¨The Substitute¨ and "Deep Water" mini-series for television and other TV series as ¨1864¨. Rating : 5/10. Average terror movie, neither extraordinary, not notable, but passable. The flick will appeal to horror/thriller genre enthusiasts.

Too many scenes where the characters make unbelievable choices, or behaviour is incongruent with the situation, particularly in the second half.

Examples

-The father does not immediately enact any consequences when he discovers his daughter has taken a job in a similar position as the one from the first film

-The estranged friend of Martin (and ex-husband of the victim, Lotte) shows up from Thailand in a remarkably short amount of time.

-Emma has left her friend to look after her night clerk position and then the friend invites their boyfriends to party, and the clerk desk is covered in beers and liquor all while playing loud dance music in a hospital that would likely have other night staff and security guards around, but it is not stopped by anyone or seen as suspicious.

-The protagonists then go for dinner, all while telling jokes and revisiting past traumas, rather than being frightened and calling police for protection as they should be concerned for their lives.

-The father and his friend have a fun bro-mance scene right after this rather than, say, commiserating at home, concerned for the safety of themselves and the rest of their family. It's almost like they needed to make one last fun memory together. The friend then gets killed off immediately after leaving the football stadium.

-In the final scenes their is a gun laying available but neither the killer or protagonist grab it immediately.

Probably more examples, but I literally laughed out loud several times in the second half of the movie because suspension of disbelief was impossible. It's really bad. But I wanted it to be good as I enjoyed the original, and the production values and cast were promising here.

I almost shut it off at the ~1h20m mark, but saw that it was a tolerable 20m more to see just how badly it could go from there.

At the end is a corny cliche beach scene, where they take run off into the water, but the water is very shallow so they keep running and at the very end it's like they are standing in a kiddie pool splashing each other. Just very awkward.

It seems like there was some intentional humour in parts of the film but there was far too much that I found funny or dumb that seemed unintentional.

I absolutely cannot understand the low ratings. This is well filmed, well acted, and keeps the heart pumping. To give it a 2 or a 1 is not sincere and that makes it akin to a D-Grade basement exploitation flick. I'm sorry you didn't like the story, but give me a break- a 2/10 for the movie as a whole? Ridiculous. If all of your ratings on IMDb are to the extreme, then maybe no more reviews for you?

The feeling of watching an over-confident protagonist let their guard down and you're filled with dread? The feeling of relief when life is put on pause and you're living in the moment? A semi-plot twist that makes you question yourself? All here.

If you don't mind subtitles, this is a good movie if you're into horror thrillers with suspense.

First Nightwatch was released in 1994 and a sequel was announced in 2022. I was surprised to hear that news because usually, it does not take that long for a horror movie sequel to arrive. Well now the year is 2024 and I could finally watch Nightwatch 2. I can tell you the atmosphere is not as eerie and scary as in the first movie. However, this does not mean that this movie is not worth watching but it is worth it. This movie is based on revenge and it is a rematch. I loved the duo of Bodnia and Waldau in the first movie and again we have the duo in the second. I liked the ending of this movie and I advise everyone to watch the first movie before watching this to remember the details. I give 8 over 10! Good job Mr. Bornedal!

No pun intended - it has been a while since I watched the original movie. Yes this is a sequel! Even has the same actors (the surviving ones that is of course) ... but older! This was 30 years ago or something so there is that. But the movie takes its time to tell a new and kind of old story.

The movie tries to conjure the feeling the first movie gave to many. I will do a rewatch - and I would recommend to anyone to watch it before they watch this. Even if I was told it is not necessary. And I suppose that is true - you can enjoy this without having seen the other one. But why wouldn't you do that? Especially because this movie will sort of tell you what happens in front of your eyes - or rather happened. The trailer seems to be giving away a lot ... but not everything.

Have to admit I feel for one particular thing too. So the guessing game is quite good - try to go into this with as little knowledge as possible. And remember this is a slow burn ... and more a character piece than a slasher.

I loved the first film and when I heard that a sequel was in the making I got very excited. The excitement only grew when it was announced that Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Kim Bodnia and Ulf Pilgaard would return as Martin, Jens and Wörmer. After watching the trailer I looked forward to see what the new characters would bring to the story. The film did not disappoint me once. Brilliant cast, great writer, great storyline, great director, amazing soundtrack, amazing makeup team, fantastic cinematography, and they had picked great locations to film it, that added to the dark and twisted tone of the film.

Fanny Bornedal was amazing as Emma, the daughter of Martin and Kalinka. I especially loved her scenes together with Nikolaj, Kim, Sonja, and Ulf. Casper Kjaer Jensen's performance as Bent is absolutely fantastic, Sonja Richter plays Gunver perfectly and I love Nina Rask's Maria so much. It was wonderful to see Ulf play the creepy Wörmer once again, just as it was seeing Kim back as Jens. Nikolaj brought his A game playing the broken Martin, his performance was very believable in every way. His acting with only facial expressions and body language is one of the best that you'll ever see, that's how good they are!

I really liked the little subtle nods to the first film, it made me a little nostalgic but overall I think they fitted well into this new story being told. Just like in the first film, I really liked the twist and turns of it, that you thought you knew who the killer was and then something happened that made you question it and begin to suspect someone else. I know some don't like the scene where Jens and Martin sneak into a football stadium but I liked it, for me it showed two old friends having a good time together after not seeing each other for a very long time. The scenes in the psychiatric wards corridors were not as claustrophobic as in the first film but they still added to the suspense feeling.

I thought the ending was believable and fitted the story told well. Also liked that the final scene was some time after the events had taken place, just as in the first film, so we got to leave some of the characters in a little better place than they had previous been this time as well.

The very long wait for a sequel was totally worth it in my opinion and I hope if you ever get a chance to watch this film that you'll love it as much as I do! I watched it on dvd and with Danish subs, just like with the first film.

Watch it Subbed, saw a review against the dubbing- that's just silly.

This was a good ending to an amazing first movie.

If you've seen the first movie, and enjoyed it, then this is a very well fitted sequel.

Giving Michael Meyer-esque vibes while repeating some of the same beautifully shot and beautifully sound crafted elements from the first movie, the story, complimented by strong acting is exceptional.

While focusing on other elements than pure horror, the wider lens cast on enduring bonds, friendship, love, and family are amazing.

Allegory or not, trauma often transcends generations, and this movie serves as a well crafted reminder.