The Whisper 2 doesn’t really have a lot in common with the first short film. Or maybe it has? There are the same kind of mysterious markings on trees. and also a place where people disappear. This production is bigger, there are more actors and a more thought through plot. That’s not necessarily a good thing. Sometimes when you get too much information the mystique is spoiled.
Now, there isn’t very much information to be found here. It’s basically another movie about the same thing told from a little different perspective. The craftsmanship is very good, even though some of the dialog sounds a little unnatural. Dialog also often gives questionable acting and I think we see a couple of examples here where I don’t feel the acting is very convincing.
The tension is there though and it’s just as mysterious as the first movie. I’m not one bit clearer on what’s really going on. I like it to be a mystery. If it can be explained more in the third part, which is a feature film, that’s fine. But I don’t think an explanation in this short format would do it justice. It would just have been a wasted opportunity, unworthy of the story’s potential really.
I’m not sure if this is equally a sequel or a prequel either. It could work as both. There are things that very well could have happened before the first movie, but on the other hand, things could also be a continuation of the event already taking place.
And, I didn’t think about this when watching it, but it strikes me that it could always really be taking place at the same time as the first film. That there’s really no movement in the space-time continuum.
The Whisper 2 had better production values I think but maybe the tension and the feeling of the unknown was more effective in the first one. It’s only natural too, the first time around we didn’t know what was going on at all. This time at least we have a clue, that ought to lessen the surprise a little bit at least.
Still a very effective movie for a 13 minute run time though.
