Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, Part 2 (1996) User Reviews

I'm over it

[Tromafreak · 5/10 · 20 November 2009]

Yeah, yeah, I know. Different director, and a different Henry, even. Not quite what I had in mind, either. Perhaps a bit insulting, if you're like me, and you think highly of Henry 1, that is, unless you're, once again, like me and have extremely low standards for Horror, and are used to that sort of inconvinence, because there sure is whole lot of it. So, as far as half-ass sequels with different directors, and an all together different feel goes, this one is actually pretty good. Good, but not awesome, at least not compared to the original, which. by the way, is a masterpiece, but let's try not to hold that against Chuck Parello's underdog of a sequel. Henry 2 picks up some time after the events of the original. Henry is broke, desperate, and completely out of his mind. Henry ends up with a job cleaning porta-potties, and soon gets friendly with a co-worker and his wife (Kai and Cricket), resulting in a place to crash for a few days. Polite at first, Henry makes himself right at home after discovering Kai's hobbie... firebug. Naturally, Henry wants to play, and soon Henry introduces Kai to his own games, quickly turning this regular joe firebug into a bloodthirsty killer. But as we all know, Henry is only capable of playing well with others for so long.

I take it we weren't supposed to notice that the new Henry is about a foot shorter than Michael Rooker. In that case, forget I said anything. Henry 2 Mask Of Sanity is a much better stand-alone movie than one may think, and also has a lot going for it in the violence and terror department, despite being in the shadow of Henry one. for those who can really appreciate a quality sequel, Troll 2 is waiting. And as for Henry 2, this may sound strange, but this movie really is a worthy sequel. 7/10

Better than I expected

[Joel I · 6/10 · 13 December 1999]

The original "Henry" was a great slasher film that aimed higher than the genre: it examined the psyche of the serial killer, so that the movie was more than just scary, it was genuinely disturbing. The movie's effectiveness could be credited to the masterful performance by John Rooker in the title role (in a less skittish world, he would have been Oscar nominated) and by the no nonsense direction of John McNaughton, which included one of the most chilling closing shots of all time. I happened to come across the present sequel in Blockbusters and, noting that it had a different actor in the title role and a different director (as well as an almost non-existent theatrical release), I checked it out with low expectations. Well, I was surprised. The movie is much better than it has a right to be. It copies the tone and content of the original pretty closely (including ultra-graphic gore), but at least it gets it right. And Neil Giuntono gives a perfectly good performance as Henry (like Rooker, he effectively underplays the role). The lower working class milieu that Henry finds himself a part of is as vividly captured as it is unsympathetic. If you liked the original "Henry," or if you're a fan of the psycho-killer genre, this sequel is definitely worth checking out. If you're not into this kind of movie (even when well done), then obviously you should pass.

Henry: Portrait Of A Sequel Killer

[hokeybutt · 4/10 · 30 July 2005]

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.

"There's plenty of people out there who hate me...can't let them win."

[Backlash007 · 10 April 2005]

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 2 wasn't too bad it's not the best horror film but it one of things you can enjoy but not you would say unique like Part 1

[kmkevinn-64733 · 5/10 · 28 August 2023]

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer Part 2 is the follow-up ten years later to the jaw-dropping and horrific original as Henry (now played by Neil Guintoli, who does a commendable job but is clearly no Michael Rooker) continues to drift from city to city, racking up a limit-less number of vicious murders. Henry's new stomping grounds has him working for a port-a-potty company where he meets married couple Kai (Rich Komenich) and Cricket (Kate Walsh of Grey's Anatomy, who probably now leaves this movie off her resume), who take Henry into their home. While Kai introduces Henry to his seedy underworld of fire arson (for profit), Henry introduces Kai to his own world of serial killing, which takes them down a darkened path that dooms the entire family. Overall, Henry 2 is dealt the hardest hand ever from the very beginning as it carries on without such important figures to the original film like the original Henry (Rooker) as well as writer/director John McNaughton. While Giuntoli has some decent experience in film by having played in such films as Child's Play, The Borrower (McNaughton's follow-up after Henry), and The Shawshank Redemption, his own interpretation of the infamous Henry character cannot hold a candle to Rooker's. Still, director Chuck Parello manages to create a moderately engaging and violent film that almost carries the same kind of tone and feel that the original had. There's a bit more gore and blood involved in the deaths, which was nice, but in the end, Henry 2 is a weak follow-up to the original. That being said, if this film were presented with a different title (like it weren't a sequel), then this would be a pretty good serial killer movie. Not bad.

Poor sequel

[a.north · 5/10 · 24 June 2000]

This is nothing more than a series of badly staged violent scenes base around the perpertrators situation with his unfortunate house friends and the wider community.

Apart from reasonable photography at times this picture has no merit which was annoying as the local T.V. guide gave it 5 stars!

Hideous, boring failure

[fertilecelluloid · 1/10 · 6 January 2006]

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.

Descent sequel

[pizowell · 7/10 · 2 January 2001]

Henry 2: Mask Of Sanity is the sequel to- you guessed it Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer. Why make a sequel to the masterpiece? I don't know. Henry 2 lacks the sense of emptiness that the original generated perfectly. It also lacked Michael Rooker's Oscar caliber performance of Henry. But Henry 2 is no less disturbing.

Henry has wondered into a small town looking for work and a place to stay. He gets a job delivering and cleaning porto-potties and moves in with a co-worker until he gets his feet off the ground. Henry and his new friend soon start to kill. The idea of brutally killing total strangers cause you've had a bad day is disturbing in itself, but Henry 2 does it in more of a graphic slasher-esque manner than the original. I didn't understand why Henry and his new friend just didn't kill the poeple they were pissed at instead of taking it out on strangers. I did enjoy Henry 2, but its hard to compare it to the original, so don't. Neil Giuntoli portrays Henry in the same quiet manner Michael Rooker did, but is in no way as good or convincing. I give props to Chuck Perello for writing and directing a descent flick, he had the right ideas, but........ I recommend Henry 2, but don't compare or think it will live up to the original cause you'll just let yourself down. Appreciate Henry 2 for itself.

Nothing on the first "Henry"

[erasure3 · 4/10 · 1 December 1998]

I was hesitant for a sequel to the shocking Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, which was both graphically and psychologically disturbing. It seems that the shock and psychology of the first gave way to boring dialogues and less-than-effective acting. Perhaps the producers were hoping to cash in on the cult-following of the first "Henry".

A Tolerable Sequel to the Masterpiece

[pizowell · 7/10 · 8 January 2001]

You might wonder why Chuck Perello decided to make a sequel to Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. Did he think that it would live up to the original masterpiece? Of course it didn't. In this installment Henry played by Neil Giuntoli, is looking for work and finds it. Cleaning and delivering porto-johns. He moves in with a co-worker until he gets his feet off the ground. His new friend soon discovers that the quiet soft spoken Henry is a psycho, but he (like Henry's buddy in the original) soon begin killing total strangers for kicks.

While the film has its similarities and differences to the original Perello still manages to acquire a cold empty feeling which was present in the original Henry although not as strongly. Henry 2 tries a more graphic approach toward the murders, but is no less disturbing than the original. Neil Giuntoli approaches the character of Henry in the same way Michael Rooker did, with a certain quiet. But Giutoli is in no way as effective. If you choose to rent Henry 2, enjoy it for it and don't try comparing it to the original, cause you'll just be let down. Let Henry 2 stand on its own two feet.

Obsessed with Murder

[sol-kay · 5/10 · 25 February 2007]

(Some Spoilers) We at first see on the screen a montage of murders committed by Henry, Neil Giunatli,as he then viciously smashes in the head of a terrified woman, Peneople Milford, whom he kidnapped in the woods. This is just to show us in the audience that he's still out there and back in action after 10 years since the first "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Murderer" movie was released. Henry when we first see him in this sequel is anything but the effective killing machine that we saw back in 1986. Instead he's a homeless and shiftless drifter who spends most of his time in soup kitchens and flop houses where he has to put up with witnessing sick and inhuman indignities, like man on man rape, that would drive most people out of their skulls.

Looking for a job Henry gets involved with this port-a-toilet company offering him $40.00 a day that he takes without hesitation since Henry must feel that this is about as good a job he'll get. Since besides being a serial murderer, which of course he keeps to himself, what other talents does he have to offer any employer. Working for his boss Rooter and his right-hand man Kai, Daniel Allar & Rich Komenich, Henry at first seems to have gotten away from his urge to murder. Since he's occupied working long hours draining out and hauling the smelly and disgusting waste products from the johns to the local waste treatment plant. One evening Henry learns that both Rooter & Kai are not all all that interested in what their supposed to be doing but using it as a front for their real job. A job that pays as much as $1,500, not the $40.00 that Henry has been getting, a day. Their professional torches or arsonists who are hired to burn down, and make it look like an accident, highly insured properties by the very persons who own them.

Getting involve in torching private houses and wear-houses gives Henry the opportunity to get back to his murderous ways. This shocks his friend and fellow arsonist Kai who at first thought that Henry was a real stand-up guy who you can go out to the local bar and have a couple of beers with. With Henry getting so completely caught up with his homicidal tendencies, he mostly kills just to keep from getting bored, Kai's wife Cricket, Kate Welsh, wants him out of her and Kia's house where Henry is a non-paying tenant. The last straw with Cricket is when her what seems like semi-retarded niece Louisa, Carri Levenson, falls madly in love with the madman.

Henry to his credit want's nothing to do with Lousia knowing that he's not her type but the star-struck young girl won't take no for an answer going so far as to threaten suicide if he doesn't marry her and take her away from both Kai & her aunt Cricket. During all this time Henry is slowly getting the somewhat alcoholic Kai involved in a string of brutal murders that has nothing at all to do with either the port-a-toilet or arson business but does quench Henry's thirst for blood and violence.

Like the Frankenstein Monster Henry loses what little control he had of himself and uses what he learned from both Kai and Rooter for his own evil purposes. In the end Henry ends up murdering both of them and later together with Kia's murdered wife Cricket incinerates them. In the case of Kia, while he's still alive and breathing, in order to hide the evidence of his crimes.

The relationship that Henry had with Lousia was about the only interesting thing in the film. Since it showed that he had at least some kind of human feelings in not wanting her to be stuck with him knowing that this brief sense of humanity, on Henry's part, may quickly evaporate and lead him to murder her, which for some strange reason he was very reluctant to do. It turned out that the very emotionally disturbed Lousia didn't have to have Henry do her in since she did a good job, by blowing her brains out, doing it herself.

Nowhere as good as the original but still very shocking to watch in that Henry now has a new weapon, in becoming a skilled torch man or arsonist, in his vast arsenal of death and destruction. A weapon which he'll undoubtedly use in the future to continue his reign of terror on humanity. A weapon of death and destruction which he learned from his former employers and latest victims Kai & Rooter.

Effective sequel.

[Hey_Sweden · 8/10 · 9 October 2013]

Granted, as written and directed by Chuck Parello, it inevitably falls short when compared to a genuinely disturbing predecessor, but it works nevertheless. Lead actor Neil Giuntoli ("Child's Play", "The Shawshank Redemption") is no Michael Rooker - he can't match Rookers' level of intensity - but he does do alright in the role of glum loner Henry.

His life at a real low point, Henry ends up taking a job in the port-a-potty business. He makes the acquaintance of married couple Kai (Rich Komenich) and Cricket (Kate Walsh of 'Grey's Anatomy'), and they offer to let him room with them for a while. Henry soon finds out about Kai's second job, as an arsonist for hire. Henry tags along with Kai on these arson gigs until they discover two squatters in a building. It's here that Henry is able to satisfy his need to kill, and from then on there's no turning back as he convinces Kai to turn killer. Their murders weigh heavy on Kai's conscience, but he's gotten in too deep.

One good thing that can be said about this sequel is that it stays true to itself and its grim depictions of life. It follows a pretty predictable story line, working towards the kind of resolution that marked the original. As we can see, Henry just doesn't work that well with other people. Parello utilizes the same approach as John McNaughton in not judging his characters, but presenting their f'd up lives in a matter of fact way.

The acting is solid from all concerned, and the film is generally well crafted, with some creepy moments and doses of grisly violence. It's about as good a sequel as the first "Henry" could have gotten.

Eight out of 10.

After a few minutes Henry is back

[sences · 7/10 · 22 November 2003]

When I started to watch the movie my first thought was: This isn't Henry, But if the character starts to talk and kill than this movie becomes a very decent following story of the first movie. Henry again has a criminal friend and a women that doesn't get the respect she earns and the story begins again...

Without Michael Rooker there's no `Henry'!

[Coventry · 3/10 · 27 May 2004]

No matter how brilliant and stunning the screenplay would have been, this sequel to `Henry, Portrait of a Serial Killer' was doomed to automatically lose 99% percent of its power. Why? Because Michael Rooker didn't reprise his role of the relentless serial killer. The way he gave image to Henry made clear that no one could ever equal him. Actually, when I first saw `Portrait of Serial Killer' (at much younger age than generally recommended) and not knowing who Rooker was, I really was convinced he was a real madman! Neil Giuntoli was the rather unknown actor given the thankless task to play the `new' Henry Lee Lucas. And he obviously tries his best. In fact, he tries a little too hard! Throughout the entire movie, it seems like he's trying to be Michael Rooker instead of Henry Lee Lucas. `Mask of Sanity' lacks the rawness of the original. The original was a brutal, stone-cold documentary completely lacking humanity. This sequel is `friendlier' and basically easier to get into. Henry is still at large after his initial killing spree and homeless. He accepts a job as a toilet cleaner and goes to life with one of his colleagues. Henry fools around with a suicidal teenager (she looks like a younger version of Jennifer Love Hewitt with binoculars attached to her head) and deserves a little extra money as an arsonist. Soon, his appetite for murder rises again and he finds a new partner in the man he lives with. Mask of Sanity is a rather redundant sequel without any mentionable aspects. The acting is okay while the tension level is rather weak. The disturbance-elements featuring in the original have entirely vanished, and that was exactly what made the original immortal. The ending is left open for another sequel, although I hope that'll never come.

Close enough...

[Parca · 19 December 1998]

I thought this was going to be REALLY bad. Luckily I was wrong. It tries to imitate the pattern of the first one. It is well paced, with a psychological build-up similar to the first one. However, the acting occasionally slips, and so does the direction. The punches thrown in the film are some of the fakest looking ever, for example... Still, despite a few mistakes, it comes close to the first one in every sense of the other, while still being slightly inferior. Not a bad rental.

Ugh..Just ugh.

[Kittiana · 5/10 · 7 September 2003]

Okay, this movie was pretty bad. The acting was simply terrible in my opinion...but maybe I just didn't like the characters. I have not watched the first one but I am pretty sure it'll be 100x more better then this one. (I hope..) Don't waste your money on watching this movie, trust me.

Too much of a waste of time to be a disappointment

[A-Ron-2 · 1/10 · 9 March 2000]

I had no intention of seeing this piece of schlock, but finally caved into temptation. I had to see why anyone would bother to make a sequel to a film that obviously did not need one (much like Jaws), well I did not expect much and got even less. This film is a gratuitous waste of time that has nothing like the intensity of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. Henry was not a slasher film, it is human portrait, better yet a sort of cynical comment on films about real people. Henry Lee Lucas was a real person, but certainly not the type of person that has any right being venerated in film. Even if he did not kill all of the people that he claimed to, he is still a degenerate who has still killed.

This film was a meditation on the type of mind that can do these horrible things, it is a commentary on the evil in man's heart. Henry was not exploitive in any way (which is why I object to it being placed in the Horror section at video stores and its being referred to as a Slasher film), it was grim and unpleasantly realistic. It did not attempt to be entertaining, whereas this pathetic sequel does, it tries to portray Henry as a slasher or a character rather than the simple, banal evil of the original film. I am completely baffled by the fact that this film was ever made and what possibly could have motivated it (well, money of course, but thats not an excuse).

A bad idea that should have remained on the chalk board.

[Captain_Couth · 2/10 · 29 January 2005]

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.

What next: Maniac 2: Zito's Return? Natural Born Killers 2: Mickey and Mallory's European Vacation?

[BA_Harrison · 7/10 · 27 January 2010]

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is one of the most disturbing serial killer flicks of all time, but seemed to me to be an unlikely candidate for the sequel treatment: despite receiving praise from serious horror fans, the original film's grim subject matter and unflinching approach to cold-blooded murder was hardly blockbuster material, meaning no-one was ever going to get rich or famous by making a follow up.

But what surprises me even more than the fact that a sequel was actually made, is that this film, a virtual rehash of the original bereft of both the first film's star, Michael Rooker, and its director, John McNaughton, actually turns out to be much better than I had expected: it is suitably repugnant, sleazy, violent and shocking, and even though it never quite matches the power of McNaughton's classic, it's an effective little serial killer flick that refuses to pull its punches and certainly doesn't deserve to be ignored.

In Mask of Sanity, Neil Giuntoli replaces Rooker in the central role of Henry, a seemingly mild but psychotic drifter who leaves a trail of death wherever he goes. Penniless and homeless, Henry finds himself a job servicing porta-loos, where he makes friends with workmate Kai (Rich Komenich) who invites Henry to stay with his family, sexy wife Cricket (Kate Walsh) and geeky niece Louisa (Carri Levinson), until he can find more permanent lodgings.

When Henry discovers that Kai has been setting fire to warehouses for a little extra cash, his newfound pal cuts him in on the deal; in return, Henry shows Kai how he keeps busy in his spare time: by murdering people!

Writer/director Chuck Parello does a pretty good job at emulating McNaughton's style, taking time to build his characters and develop their relationships whilst also presenting scenes of extreme violence in a cold, matter of fact style. At first Neil Giuntoli is hard to accept as Henry, being less physically imposing than Rooker (thanks to his rather short stature), but once he has done away with a few innocent people in brutal and bloody fashion, there is no doubt that he was a good choice for the part. If you're not even a little bit frightened of Giuntoli's Henry after he casually hacks off one poor victim's head with a knife, you're made of tougher stuff than me!

Admittedly, Mask of Sanity rarely strays from the formula set by the first film, even going so far as to start with a montage of Henry's earlier victims and end with a nihilistic finalé that sees the killer lay waste to virtually everyone he knows before once again moving on; but even though the format is familiar, this unlikely sequel is definitely more hit than miss.

Does Not Succeed Successfully

[chicchic · 4/10 · 11 October 2018]

Watch if you're a fan - viewer otherwise; can certainly do with out :-)

Henry returns

[videorama-759-859391 · 7/10 · 18 April 2020]

Chuck Parello was the guy that swarmed in, and made all these real life serial killer flicks, back to back with B grade theatrics. I was expecting that was this, but boy I was wrong, as he's made a solid, well holstered film, which continues the shock horror, bloodshed, and murderous, exploits, of our real life, and very successful SK. This one, a better Henry, has more heart, filling of characters to it, and does shares familiar traits with the first one, as to the situation of characters, direction of story, style of shock violence, perpetrated on innocent victims, and of course Henry's intentions. Even it's starting, it bares a too horrific and familiar resemblance, showing us to Henry's recent kills. The lead playing Henry is a bit of a worry. Although he does play it well to a degree, and has the Rooker hairstyle, the original with Rooker was a more inheld and natural performance. Our Henry here, wears an angry, tensed up face, 24/7, anyone in real life, would steer ten feet away from him. This film, I'm happy to say, had more going for it, despite it all, too seeming like the first one, with it's many similarities. I must admit, I didn't it to be this good or enjoyable. Again, don't ever judge a B movie by it's cover. Some very good performances from our cast, and the drunkard we won't forget.

This henry is terrible, pass it's not good at all!!!

[joiningjt · 4/10 · 29 October 2020]

The original had an incredibly great performance by Michael rooker and to me it's like psycho no one can play norman bate except perkins and no one can play henry but rooker. This movie was not worth the effort it was inferior to the original by a long shot!!!!

A Severely Underrated Gem Of A Serial Killer Flick.

[Vivekmaru45 · 8/10 · 18 August 2014]

I would give this film a perfect 10, save for the fact that the film ends rather abruptly and that no conclusive third installment of the film was ever made.

The film continues from the earlier Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer, directed and co-written by John McNaughton, which starred Michael Rooker as the title character.

Trivia: For those of you that don't know, and are seeing this film for the first time, the character of Henry is based on the real-life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas(August 23, 1936 - March 13, 2001).

Lucas was arrested in Texas and on the basis of his confessions hundreds of unsolved murders attributed to him were officially classified as cleared up. Lucas was convicted of murdering 11 people and condemned to death for a single case with an unidentified victim. He recanted all his statements and a study by the Attorney General of Texas concluded he had falsely confessed; the death sentence was commuted to life in prison in 1998. On March 13, 2001, Lucas died in prison from heart failure at age 64. He is buried at Captain Joe Byrd Cemetery in Huntsville, Texas. Lucas' grave is currently unmarked due to incidents of vandalism or theft.

The sequel is directed by Chuck Parello and shows Henry as a drifter who is looking for work. He finds employment with a port-o-john company where he meets two employees, Kai and his wife Cricket. They take pity on Henry when they learn that he is a homeless drifter and offer him a room in their home. While there he meets Cricket's emotionally fragile teenage niece, Louisa. Louisa eventually becomes close and falls in love with Henry.

Similar to the first film, Henry reveals his dark-side to Kai. He involves Kai in his random murders and threatens to expose him to his wife Cricket if he ever leaves him or reveals his secret to anyone.

Watch the film to find out what happens next.

More Serial Killer films: Copycat, Bone Daddy, The Bone Collector, The Watcher(2000), To Catch A Killer, Confessions Of A Serial Killer, Deranged, The Deliberate Stranger, Dahmer, The Secret Life: Jeffrey Dahmer (1993), Ted Bundy, Citizen X, Evilenko, The Boston Strangler (1968), Albert Fish: In Sin He Found Salvation, The Gray Man.

Not as good as the firstl, but still a good watch.

[poolofzenda · 7/10 · 23 November 2023]

This sequel lacks the original's star actor and does not quite measure up to it, but "Mask of sanity" is still well worth a watch.

Set ten years after the first film it stars Neil Giuntoli as Henry, Rich Komenich as Kai, Kate Walsh as Cricket and Carri Levinson as Louisa.

Henry continues his killing spree after getting a job at a porta-loo company and he moves in with fellow worker kai and his wife Cricket.

Ignore the low scores, for a fan of indie cinema this follow up is pretty decent. Pretty much a rehash of the plot of the original, but well done, decent acting and cinematography.

7/10.

Better than you might think...

[Wizard-8 · 7 January 1999]

I thought this movie was going to suck, considering (1) how good the first movie was, and (2) that the original writer/director and Michael Rooker didn't return. I was surprised that this movie actually isn't a bad follow-up. Even if the first movie never existed, this would still be an interesting movie. It's obvious that the director was really trying hard to duplicate the feel of the first movie. Movie does somewhat fudge its look at the thoughts of the characters, and how the characters change in the movie, but the characters still have some interest. So it's not without interest - just don't expect a masterpiece.