Critical response
Five Nights at Freddy's 2 received negative reviews from critics, who deemed that it was more ambitious than its predecessor, but fell flat on both storytelling and scares. On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, 17% of 131 critics' reviews are positive, with an average rating of 3.9/10. The website's consensus reads: "A step down from an already clunky original, Five Nights at Freddy's 2 goes through the motions with all the grace of a malfunctioning animatronic." Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned the film a score of 26 out of 100, based on 24 critics, indicating "generally unfavorable" reviews. Audiences polled by CinemaScore gave the film an average grade of "B" on an A+ to F scale, down from the first film's "A−" grade.
In his review for the Associated Press, Mark Kennedy gave the film zero stars out of four, deriding it as "an incoherent mess", having "an after-school special vibe with no real horror and no real awareness that it should". The A.V. Club offered a harsher critique, citing the film's pacing, exposition, and difficulty balancing horror elements with its dense mythos, ultimately calling it a disappointing follow-up that struggles to stand on its own. In a negative review, Cody Dericks of Next Best Picture criticized the film's screenplay, storytelling, and reliance on fan service, calling it "perhaps the worst film of the year" and stating that it offered "nothing of value" beyond the animatronics. He ultimately awarded the sequel a score of 1 out of 10. Gary Goldstein of the Los Angeles Times criticized the film as a "laughably cheesy" and "empty-headed" sequel, arguing that its script, dialogue, pacing, and lack of tension make it inferior to the first film. He described the set pieces as "thrill-free," the acting as "subpar", and the animatronics as often "silly and toothless," concluding that the sequel is suited "for die-hards only."
James Mottram of NME awarded the film 1 out of 5 stars, calling it a "sauceless" and "dismal" sequel that lacks originality, scares, and humor. He criticized its lore expansion and what he described as one of the "poorest movies of 2025". Owen Gleiberman of Variety acknowledged the film's stronger visuals and polished production values compared to its predecessor, but argued that its "excess of subplots" and heavy reliance on franchise lore might alienate casual audiences. In his review for The Guardian, Jesse Hassenger described Five Nights at Freddy's 2 as one of the worst films of the year, calling it "inept game-based horror". Nick Schager of The Daily Beast called the film "one of the worst video-game movies ever," criticizing its screenplay and what he described as "fright-free mush" that fails to build on the original. He argued that the sequel relied on jump scares, underwritten characters, and inconsistent mythology, concluding that it "makes no effort to be frightening or engaging." The Hollywood Reporter review by Frank Scheck described the film as a sequel that largely repeated its predecessor.
Alonso Duralde of The Film Verdict called the film a "dull and incompetent sequel," criticizing its reliance on jump scares, character decisions, and what he described as a "blisteringly stupid screenplay." He argued that the sequel failed to expand its appeal beyond fans of the games and "makes no effort to offer anything beyond jerky, blinking robots." Tim Grierson of Screen Daily gave the film a negative review, arguing that despite the impressive animatronic work by Jim Henson's Creature Shop, the sequel was "as inanimate as its predecessor," lacking scares, tension, and narrative cohesion. He criticized the film's reliance on jump scares, character arcs, and set pieces, concluding that the sequel "never breaks free of its own conventionality." In his review on Screen Rant, Alex Harrison gave Five Nights at Freddy's 2 a rating of 3 out of 10. He critiqued the film as a "mess", despite its higher production values and ambitious storytelling.
Ian Freer of Empire gave Five Nights at Freddy’s 2 two out of five stars, calling it a "weak" sequel. He criticized the animatronics, the reliance on jump scares, and writing and performances. Bilge Ebiri of Vulture gave the film a negative review, describing it as a "bleak" and "confused" sequel and criticized its atmosphere and called the Marionette's introduction "boring," concluding that young fans "deserve better." Petrana Radulovic of Polygon criticized the film for its storytelling and reliance on game knowledge, arguing that Five Nights at Freddy's 2 "gets lost in its own lore" and leaves newcomers feeling excluded. Beatrice Loayza of The New York Times review of Five Nights at Freddy's 2 described it as a "marginally bigger and badder sequel that still struggles with sluggish pacing and bland dialogue. While it offers more intricate set pieces and some solid kill scenes, the film remains as tame and creaky as its signature animatronics, ultimately overworked and lacking tension."
/Film was also negative, awarding the sequel a 4 out of 10. The review praised the practical animatronic effects and some successful moments of tension reminiscent of the original game, but criticized the screenplay. Megan Garside of GamesRadar+ praised the film's upgraded animatronics and a handful of scares, but criticized its "confusing and muddled storyline", character development, and felt that actors such as Matthew Lillard and Skeet Ulrich were underused. Jim Slotek of Original-Cin gave the film a C+, saying that "Five Nights at Freddy's 2 is messy and unfocused but works as a fan-centric sequel packed with in-jokes, references, and energetic animatronic chaos." Aidan Kelley’s review on Collider highlighted improvements in animatronics and practical effects but criticized the character development.
In a positive review, Simon Abrams of RogerEbert.com gave the film three stars out of four, praising its storytelling, visuals, and horror-adventure tone.
Common Sense Media gave the film one star out of five, describing it as an "[a]bysmal, illogical, and unwatchable horror sequel".
In December 2025, the film was ranked 2nd on a Variety list of "The Worst Movies of 2025" by Owen Gleiberman and Peter Debruge.
