I remember watching this movie as a child, probably 6 years old and being truly terrified. I would stay up at night dreading green ooze leaking from my body. Watching it now, I have to give it props. The storyline is creative, the acting is bad... but still comical enough to keep you interested... all in all it's a fun, corny 90's movie. It falls in line with Leperchan or Gremlins.

There's that saying about going bast bad to good and back again...then back again and again.This movie is one that makes the cycle so many times that it may be impossible to keep track. It is truly bad to the point of being surreal and if you can endure it you are sure to laugh as you never have before.

I watched the first 15 minutes. The acting went all down hill when the sister came into the picture. It got worse from there. This does absolutely no justice to the original. It's utter disappointment in my eyes.

i know that i am going to be the only person to love this movie. i use to watch it when i was a teen (while under the influence) and it was funny as hell. my bf and i would put blue and green food coloring in out yogurt and also in our cream cheese to spread over bagels. yes, i do agree that the movie was horrible, but it was so horrible that it was funny.

First consider this:
*Most of the crew spoke only Italian, causing many doubts about how the movie would work.
* The director insisted that the lines in the script be recited verbatim. (from imdb)At least the kids were entertained by the 1st Troll movie and laughed w/out being scared (with Troll part 2 movie, less chuckles from the kids, only occasionally laughing at HOW bad this movie was made), but most of this Troll part 2 movie was neither entertaining nor scary, just lame sauce.You could call it the opposite of a Triple Threat:
1. Some mediocre ACTING but mostly f*cking HORRIBLE acting. I've seen people read off a teleprompter with more spirit. In contrast, several Hollywood stars in the 1st Troll movie.
2. Bad DIRECTING (led to most of the horrible acting, along with the bad casting). Again different director than the 1st Troll movie.
3. Somewhat "we todd did" SCRIPT compared to the 1st Troll movie, very little action or suspense or fantasy/creativity and awfully lacking in character-development. Maybe the cholesterol was clogging their brains & giving the writers Alzheimer's. (you'll understand if you watch the movie ;-) )I kept wanting to give this movie a chance since Troll #1 was so good. THAT Troll movie with "Harry Potter" was at least good enough for JK Rowling to probably think "yeah, not-so-scary horror/fantasy for kids, let me do that, and use the name Harry Potter". Really, re-watch Troll #1, it's essentially the same plot as Troll #2 but better done.
. . . They shoulda enlisted the writers and director that made Troll #1, and at least enlist experienced/talented actors, who are also Anglophones. If your cast speaks Italian, have them act in Italian, then use talented voice-actors or translators to do good subtitles or voice-overs (or better yet, ya cheap bastids shoulda spent more money to pay for Hollywood actors, or at least an Italian who is bilingual if the English-speaking market is your target-audience).

Wow these actors must be mentally challenged...seriously