Horror sequels tend to suck. Saw, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, Poltergeist — all of these horror films produced countless crappy sequels and only a few of them were good films to begin with.

So, it’s no surprise that after the phenomenal (and well-deserved) success of last year’s Paranormal Activity, Hollywood was eager to serve up a sequel. But relax; Hollywood did it right for once because Paranormal Activity 2 does not, in fact, suck.

Paranormal Activity 2 doesn’t try to change the effective formula that the first film utilized so well. Once again the majority of the film is static night-vision shots (this time there are six security cameras recording the various areas of the house) with domestic goings-on interspersed between them to lend authenticity to the nighttime scares.

This similarity to the original film isn’t detrimental to this one’s success — it likely would’ve been a lot worse had they changed the formula dramatically — but it does make it a somewhat redundant film. The first film is scarier and better, perhaps because its extremely low-budget and very limited set-up made the film not only terrifying but also very authentic. Nevertheless, there are aspects of PA2 that succeed very well, and when all’s said and done, it’ll likely end up being the scariest film you’ll see this year.

This time around a demon is haunting Kristi Rey (Sprague Grayden), her husband Daniel (Brian Boland), his daughter from a previous marriage, Ali (Molly Ephraim), the new baby Hunter and the dog Abby. Hunter and Abby seem physically aware of the demon’s presence along with the Latino nanny, Martine, proving once again that Hollywood thinks that animals, children and foreigners believe in ghosts, but the average white person does not.

Anyway, it just so happens that Kristi’s sister is Katie (Katie Featherston) and her boyfriend Micah (Micah Sloat), the protagonists from the first film. They show up briefly and add significance to the plot greater than just cameo nods to the original film. Their inclusion makes PA2 a kind of prequel/sequel hybrid, but you’ll just have to see it to find out how.

The acting is actually better than in the previously film (Featherson and Sloat included) if only because the actors are better trained and had time to develop their skills. Still, PA2 is meant to be found-footage, so don’t expect anyone to go Daniel Day-Lewis on you. These actors aren’t winning Oscars but they’re also not the reason you’re seeing this movie.

The main reason anyone would want to see PA2 is for the scares. Once again the static night-vision images force you to stare at the screen in apprehension, nervously awaiting something sinister to happen. They’re scary and all the scarier if you allow yourself to be drawn in by them. You’re given time to run your eyes over the entire shot, escalating the tension as you look for the source of your fear. While the inclusion of six different camera set-ups does allow you a greater view of the house, they aren’t quite as effective as the single camera of the first film, simply because they break the tension by literally cutting between the shots.

What the filmmakers so wisely understand is that the terror is really coming from your head. They craft the scenes in such a way as to manipulate innate fears of the unknown, with the darkness and the noises playing upon each other to make everything far more terrifying than it should be. A tense sequence involving Kristi and her kitchen appliances as well as a frenzied scene in the cluttered, spooky basement stand out as particularly terrifying scenes, mostly because they’re innovative and do things that weren’t done in the first film.

Also, unlike the first Paranormal Activity, the daytime scenes in PA2 offer only false relief from tension; the horror quickly spills over into the safety of the day and some of the film’s most chilling sequences happen in full sunshine. Also, dog lovers beware: demons and dogs do not get along.

Ultimately, Paranormal Activity 2 is an effective horror film with plenty of scares. Even if it doesn’t live up to the excellent first film, it’s loads better than Saw II, Friday the 13th: Part II, Freddy’s Revenge, or any of the other multitudes of crappy sequels to beloved horror films. What worked the first time around works this second time, even if it doesn’t seem as fresh.

This is not the innovative, game-changing film that its predecessor was but for horror sequels, it doesn’t get much better than Paranormal Activity 2.