Rock, paper … sunlight? Distributed by Netflix on Dec. 1, director Roar Uthaug’s sophomore installment in the “Troll” franchise revisits the conflict between humans and awakened, rock-like trolls wreaking havoc on Norwegian civilization.

While the original 2022 film offered a creative take on both Norwegian folklore and the disaster film genre, “Troll 2” struggles to recapture that same magic, stumbling under the weight of a bloated narrative that mistakes “bigger” for “better.”

The film reunites a returning cast of scientist Nora Tidemann (Ine Marie Wilmann), government worker Andreas Isaksen (Kim S. Falck-Jørgensen) and Major Kristoffer “Kris” Holm (Mads Sjøgård Pettersen) as they face a familiar but more sinister threat: a massive troll, Jotun, running amok and eating civilians, on a rampage more destructive and antagonistic than that of previous trolls.

Jotun is inextricably linked to various major historical events in Norway — such as the Norwegian heavy water sabotage and St. Olaf’s Christianization of the country — offering a strong and interesting expansion of earlier “Troll” lore.

While evolutionary biologist Marion (Sara Khorami) hopes to capture trolls for medical research, thinking they have value and purpose beyond destruction, the Norwegian prime minister believes in eliminating trolls, viewing it as the only road to national peace.

Fascinating questions about environmental ethics are raised, such as the relationship between religion and nonhumans, communication with other sentient beings and the practicality of enforcing environmental conservation when human lives are at stake.

These emotional conflicts, ethical debates and historical tie-ins, however, fail to sustain their intrigue, as the film quickly abandons them in favor of hitting the basic monster movie story beats. Characters, for example, shift allegiances without meaningful development, leading to shallow character growth and an overall message that’s even emptier.

To the cast’s credit, their performances are consistently convincing throughout, even as the script asks them to navigate increasingly absurd territory.

Wilmann’s heartfelt delivery bolsters the story’s emotional throughline. Falck-Jørgensen’s comedic timing lightens the overall tension, and Khorami’s direct seriousness grounds the film in reality.

All plotlines are executed with the utmost sincerity, and each performer tries their best to elevate material that fluctuates between boring and outlandish, with no middle ground.

However, their effort feels unrewarded: Despite their lengthy group screentime, both individual and group identities feel undercooked.

There are clear attempts to differentiate each character at the beginning and remind the audience of the personalities that colored the original film. Unfortunately, each individual’s roles and values gradually blend into one another; previously staunch stances, vendettas and other such conflicts disappear almost immediately without question.

Perhaps the most lackluster aspect of “Troll 2” is its action sequences. Unlike successful Kaiju films such as “Godzilla vs. Kong” (2021) or “Pacific Rim” (2013), which deliver massive set pieces that justify the existence of the monster-disaster movie genre, the troll confrontations here feel oddly underwhelming.

Not only do the creatures lack distinctive powers, à la Godzilla’s iconic atomic breath, but their humanoid appearances and lumbering movements strip away their “otherworldly” menace, resulting in fights that look more like glorified bar brawls than epic monster battles.

The film does show occasional creativity in its fight scenes, with trolls wielding broken bridges or telephone lines as improvised weapons, but these moments are too brief.

Considering that both of the troll vs. troll confrontations end all too quickly and always with the subjugation of the same troll, these few positive moments of creativity are not enough to compensate for the overall lukewarm action atmosphere.

Not only does “Troll 2” mistake scale for stakes and open philosophical cans of worms that it never addresses, but it even appears to contradict its humanitarian position on the debate. If communication with trolls is possible, and all sentient beings matter, why does Nora, initially opposed to killing rogue trolls, not attempt to converse with Jotun?

In a moment of meta-commentary, the story has Andreas remark, “Nobody is a fan of sequels,” only for another character to retort: “Everybody loves a good sequel.”

This self-referential insert falls flat. Yes, excellent sequels exist: “Terminator 2: Judgement Day” (1991), “Aliens” (1986), “Shrek 2” (2004), “Kung Fu Panda 2” (2011) and others, for example.

But unlike “Troll 2,” these films understood how to expand their world while maintaining what made the originals work. With an economical 105-minute runtime, perhaps more time could have been spent developing the characters or advancing the ethical dilemmas it proposed in the beginning.

In the end, “Troll 2” is a disappointing step back for the broader monster movie genre, slotting itself comfortably into movie purgatory, where it’s not good enough to push the envelope but not bad enough to be laughably entertaining.

While the actors dignify the script with their commitment to the story, the uninteresting fight scenes and the half-hearted characterisations fail to synthesize mythology, ethics and capable performers into a satisfying story.