When I say predecessor I mean the 2018 "The Bad Seed" movie, and yeah it sucked. If you seen the first one please don't waste your time and see this movie, because the core premise and character's roles is pretty much the same. Surprisingly, even though I still think this movie still kind of suck for having the exact same premise and character's roles, I wouldn't mind this laziness; but as soon as this movie tries to put out the narrative that this psychopath wants to be with her blood family, I threw my hands up because this was a load of bull. This is the same psychopathic girl who attempted to kill her own father all because he stated that he did not know what to think of her (how dare he trying to process what his daughter did over years). Screw the fact that the man is obviously her ally and he skipped town for something she did, he had to go because she couldn't tolerate a blemish from him. Rhoda/Emma is a character who is established to only care about herself, her greed, and her narcissistic desire to be seen as the best in everything. At best she will tolerate others, at worst she will kill you if you have something that she wants or thinks she deserves and/or if she thinks that you are a threat (no matter how minor) to her, and she will dispose you. So "The Return of the Bad Seed", just stop, that narrative have so many holes and contradictions.
After you debunk that idiotic narrative, you will come across another hole in this story, which is how idiotic Emma's beef with her uncle. Why was she fighting this man? He literally was offering to send her away to a school that will greatly heighten her chances to get into an Ivy League school. Shouldn't this over-achieving, narcissistic, psychopathic, girl be delighted that someone is helping her is attempting to giving her the best, something she thinks she deserves? If this was the Emma from the first movie or even Rhoda from 1956 movie they wouldn't killed him, because he has some use to them. It's completely out of character for Emma to remotely harm a useful pawn.
Then there's Kat. She's supposed to be the Chloe of this movie. But unlike Chloe, Kat has less connections to the main antagonist (besides being a prop to demonstrate Emma's true nature in the first movie); she less effective to practically useless (Chloe helped move the plot by getting Emma's dad to finally suspect his creepy daughter; Kat is this wannabe obsessive detective who couldn't even get anyone to suspect Emma, in fact her antics made Emma seem more of the victim); and she went our way, way worse (Chloe was her babysitter/nanny of course she would look for Emma, it's her job. Plus, she was trying to woo Emma's dad; Kat had no real reason to go up to that house, and if she such an Emma expert that she made herself put to be she should've seen this trap from a mile away. But she's such a weakly connected, pointless character she couldn't resist going there and finding some purpose for her existence in this movie).
Finally, the latter part about psychological diagnosis aspects of this movie is horrendous. How did Emma "found out" she's a psychopath? By taking an online quiz! Again movie, no, just no. What puzzled me is that at first the movie was reinforcing the notion from the first that diagnosing a psychopath is quite tricky if you don't have an examples of the person you suspect having anti-social personality disorder doing something in that category. Emma's aunt literally have that psycho on camera killing a dog, instead of sending it to her therapist to see whether it relevant or not (you know having a well researched discussion about psychopathy) , we get treated to Emma taking an online quiz with some superficial questions about psychopathy that congratulate for her being diagnosed as a psychopath. Then after that this little psycho is acting like it's a badge of honor for being a psychopath. Is this movie is about a psychopath or is about people from the Millennial and Generation Z who think having a mental disorder and/or personality disorder is some badge of honor. This movie fails on so many levels, it's not even funny.
After you debunk that idiotic narrative, you will come across another hole in this story, which is how idiotic Emma's beef with her uncle. Why was she fighting this man? He literally was offering to send her away to a school that will greatly heighten her chances to get into an Ivy League school. Shouldn't this over-achieving, narcissistic, psychopathic, girl be delighted that someone is helping her is attempting to giving her the best, something she thinks she deserves? If this was the Emma from the first movie or even Rhoda from 1956 movie they wouldn't killed him, because he has some use to them. It's completely out of character for Emma to remotely harm a useful pawn.
Then there's Kat. She's supposed to be the Chloe of this movie. But unlike Chloe, Kat has less connections to the main antagonist (besides being a prop to demonstrate Emma's true nature in the first movie); she less effective to practically useless (Chloe helped move the plot by getting Emma's dad to finally suspect his creepy daughter; Kat is this wannabe obsessive detective who couldn't even get anyone to suspect Emma, in fact her antics made Emma seem more of the victim); and she went our way, way worse (Chloe was her babysitter/nanny of course she would look for Emma, it's her job. Plus, she was trying to woo Emma's dad; Kat had no real reason to go up to that house, and if she such an Emma expert that she made herself put to be she should've seen this trap from a mile away. But she's such a weakly connected, pointless character she couldn't resist going there and finding some purpose for her existence in this movie).
Finally, the latter part about psychological diagnosis aspects of this movie is horrendous. How did Emma "found out" she's a psychopath? By taking an online quiz! Again movie, no, just no. What puzzled me is that at first the movie was reinforcing the notion from the first that diagnosing a psychopath is quite tricky if you don't have an examples of the person you suspect having anti-social personality disorder doing something in that category. Emma's aunt literally have that psycho on camera killing a dog, instead of sending it to her therapist to see whether it relevant or not (you know having a well researched discussion about psychopathy) , we get treated to Emma taking an online quiz with some superficial questions about psychopathy that congratulate for her being diagnosed as a psychopath. Then after that this little psycho is acting like it's a badge of honor for being a psychopath. Is this movie is about a psychopath or is about people from the Millennial and Generation Z who think having a mental disorder and/or personality disorder is some badge of honor. This movie fails on so many levels, it's not even funny.