Child's Play 2: Is it actually better than the original?

Alright, I've just revisited "Child's Play 2" (1990) - not something I do often but I felt compelled. And I'm left wrestling with something I've seen parroted online for years: is it actually better than the original? Hear me out. I will concede that the pacing is tighter. The body count ticks up dramatically, and the toy factory set piece is genuinely inspired chaotic carnage. But does that automatically translate to superior filmmaking? I'm not so sure. The foster family dynamic introduces some interesting elements, especially with Jenny Agutter's Joanne Simpson (a truly frightening display of passive aggression), but I miss the gritty realism of the first film. The original felt more grounded, even with the supernatural element. Plus, Andy's performance feels a tad…forced. Not entirely the kid's fault, I think the script just pushes him into constant screaming fits without much nuance. And let's be honest, some of the kills are admittedly cartoonish. The Grim Reaper mallet and the inflating head of the Matron? Fun, yes, but they seem to tip the scales more toward camp than horror. Maybe I'm just being a snob, because that toy factory incinerator scene with Chucky is awesome no matter how you slice it. But am I alone in thinking the shift in tone undercuts the terror of the original ever so slightly? Does upping the body count and comedic moments really elevate this to a better film, or does it just showcase a different kind of film?