To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

If you loved "Henry - Portrait of a Serial Killer", you may hate this terrible sequel. There is nothing here to recommend. Director Chuck Parello, who also made a more recent Ed Gein film (not quite as awful, but almost), has no idea how to make a good movie. This hopeless bore is a series of badly staged murders. There is no energy, no characterization, and no horror. I wanted to like this, I really did, but by the time it hit the one hour mark, I was having trouble stopping myself from turning the TV off. Of course, in the interests of forming a fair opinion, I needed to see it out to the end. Michael Rooker was wise not to return for this hideous failure.

HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER 2- MASK OF SANITY (2 outta 5 stars) Uh, long enough title, you think? First things first: this movie is one of those In Name Only sequels... and has practically nothing to do with the original classic. It hasn't got the same writer, director, actors or even the same style. This film is of a distinctly lesser quality in every respect. (This movie has some of the absolute WORST, fakest fight choreography I have ever seen!) Neil Giuntoli stands in this time for Michael Rooker (the original Henry) and, while he has a couple of effective scenes of underlying, stoic menace, for the most part he doesn't make much of an impression. This time around Henry is on his own and looking for work. He gets a job cleaning and moving port-a-potties and makes fast friends with a co-worker, Kai (Rich Komenich). Kai and his very un-happy-looking but smolderingly sensuous wife (Kate Walsh) invite Henry to stay with them until he gets some money put together. They also have an emotionally unstable niece (Carri Levinson) who draws freaky pictures. You think, with the two women in the house making googly eyes at Henry and carrying all that emotional baggage, that the tension would escalate into something really interesting. Well, you'd be wrong. Instead, Henry finds out that Kai does arson jobs for extra cash and the two of them get sidetracked into burning down old buildings for awhile. Then Henry starts into his killing spree again, slowly involving Kai more and more. The finale is a big disappointment in all respects... hardly touching on some of the more interesting elements introduced earlier in the movie. No wonder that there hasn't been a Henry 3.

Would you want to see a sequel to Apocalypse Now? Would you want to see a sequel to A Clockwork Orange? How about Easy Rider 2? The obvious answer would be NO. So why would anyone want to see a sequel to Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer? Henry 2: Mask of Sanity is a completely unnecessary sequel. It fails in just about every way that the original succeeded. It also recycles much of the plot. Henry moves in with a lower class family, gains a new sidekick, and teaches him how to kill people. How does Henry stumble upon these kinds of guys? I guess it takes one to know one. I will give credit to Neil Giuntoli. Anyone trying to fill the original Henry's shoes is going to be in for a critical bashing, but he's actually decent. He's just no Michael Rooker (and he must stand about 5'2...needless to say he has a hard time being intimidating). Anyone interested in the continuing adventures of Henry as he teaches rednecks across the country how to terrify and kill people, should probably still avoid this. Chuck Parello went on to make the equally avoidable Ed Gein and the updated Hillside Strangler (which I have not yet seen). It seems he's a one trick pony.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, part two (1998) was an ill advised and unwelcome sequel to the dark and brutal film Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986). Many things are missing from this film that made the first one so memorable such as the original director and Michael Rooker. Without those you just have an average run-of-the-mill low budget slasher movie. The movie lacks motivation and a theme. The film makers turns Henry into just another movie monster who kills his victims creatively at every turn.The film follows the further exploits of Henry. He travels around the back woods of America continuing his murderous spree. Unlike the first film, we never get a glimpse into his sick and twisted mind. It's better to just forget this movie and pretends that it never happened. That's how I feel about this movie.Not recommended for fans and non-fans of the original. Others definitely need not apply.