Horror/Mystery/Thriller
2 hours and 14 minutes
Rated: R
Written by: Carey Hayes, Chad Hayes, James Wan, and David Leslie Johnson
Directed by: James Wan
Produced by: Rob Cowan, Peter Safran, and James Wan
Cast:
Vera Farmiga
Patrick Wilson
Frances O'Connor
Madison Wolfe
Simon McBurney
Franka Potente
The next true story from the case files of Ed and Lorraine Warren
Perhaps whenever a film boasts in its tagline that it is based on a true story, it should put quotation marks around the word: true. If you genuinely believe Hollywood's use of this tired tagline I would remind you of the Coen brothers' film Fargo which boasted this claim and was later admitted to be one hundred percent fiction. That being said, the tagline is probably the least problematic thing about James Wan's The Conjuring 2.
I wanted to like this movie. I loved its predecessor, and most of the reviews that I had read seemed quite favorable, and yet there was still a little voice in the back of my head warning me not to get my hopes up. Considering I've seen enough horror sequels (or sequels in general) to know that they can never, and have never, lived up to the potential of their predecessors, I should have listened more to that little voice - I would have been considerably less disappointed.
If the credits are any indication as to what went wrong with this highly anticipated sequel, one needs to look no further than the number of writers. Films utilizing scripts (most of the time) that are accredited to several writers feel either too convoluted or fragmented in overall tone. The Conjuring 2 suffers from the latter problem. The fingerprints of several writers not able to rally around one simple idea are all over this film. The film flows from 1970s horror/nunsploitation (yes, that is a genre, look it up), to classic ghost story chillers by way of The Amityville Horror, and it even utilizes the more modern idea of the Slenderman-like being by way of the "Crooked man". In the end, the story is a mess.
The film begins with the Warrens' investigation into the Amityville haunting (an admitted hoax) and even this feels like an unnecessary start. While it sets up the film's supposed antagonist, it treads too much upon deeply explored horror territory (much like the problems its predecessor had with The Exorcist). From here the film fumbles and tumbles from jump scare to jump scare in typical fashion of its director. The problem this time around though, is that the scares are not even masterfully executed the way they had been in The Conjuring. As one angry reviewer put it, "There's only so many times an audience is going to jump at a door being slammed in the night."
Another reason why The Conjuring was successful in what it tried to accomplish was its very minimalistic feel in regards to its specters. Ghosts were hardly shown, and when they were barely any makeup effects seemed to be used. The Conjuring 2, perhaps given a larger budget, trudged in the opposite direction in regards to this. Its antagonist, a demonic nun, is shown in its complete entirety every time it is seen (starting from the first few moments of the film). By doing this, the villain loses its power to scare the audience effectively throughout the picture. The film's other villains are also completely ineffective. The spirit of an old man looks nothing more than a grumpy old man that your family invites over for holidays out of obligation, and the Slenderman doppelganger, the Crooked man, is so poorly executed, the CGI used to construct him looks cheap, rubbery, and like something from a Roger Corman produced Syfy original movie. It's a cheap move, is poorly executed, and when it's all said and done it is disrespectful to the film's audience.
The actors do an okay job, but even Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson seem like they are simply going through the motions at this point - as if their hearts aren't really behind these performances. The film drags and this doesn't help, allowing more time for the audience to pick up on this lack of enthusiasm given to their roles. (The hokey Elvis impersonation by Patrick Wilson is cringe-worthy).
Perhaps the most interesting aspect in regards to the film is its examination of these "true" ghost stories as hoaxes. At one point, Ed and Lorraine Warren are on a TV talk show to discuss the Amityville haunting with a professor who calls them out as supporters of this fraud. It clearly makes the Warrens (although, Ed more than Lorraine) uncomfortable and adds an interesting level of reality to the film: the everyday conversation of do ghosts exist, and are people like the Warrens simply there to exploit people of their fears for their own fame? This is somewhat later brought up again through Franka Potente's character, also a paranormal investigator, who tries to expose the main case as being a fraud. Unfortunately, this subplot is swept away in both circumstances as quickly as it is brought up. The story might have been much more fascinating if this debate had been its focal point.
Demonic nuns (by way of The Devils or Demonia), creepy old men (by way of almost every Stephen King story), a cheap, rubbery, CGI ripoff of the Slenderman, performances delivered without any enthusiasm, and a fragmented and uninteresting ghost story are the ultimate downfall of James Wan's highly anticipated sequel: The Conjuring 2. Viewers looking for cheap thrills will leave more than likely satisfied with this two hour Frankenstein's monster of a film. Horror and genre aficionados, however, will leave with a very dreadful air of dissapointment.
3.5/10
I wanted to like this movie. I loved its predecessor, and most of the reviews that I had read seemed quite favorable, and yet there was still a little voice in the back of my head warning me not to get my hopes up. Considering I've seen enough horror sequels (or sequels in general) to know that they can never, and have never, lived up to the potential of their predecessors, I should have listened more to that little voice - I would have been considerably less disappointed.
If the credits are any indication as to what went wrong with this highly anticipated sequel, one needs to look no further than the number of writers. Films utilizing scripts (most of the time) that are accredited to several writers feel either too convoluted or fragmented in overall tone. The Conjuring 2 suffers from the latter problem. The fingerprints of several writers not able to rally around one simple idea are all over this film. The film flows from 1970s horror/nunsploitation (yes, that is a genre, look it up), to classic ghost story chillers by way of The Amityville Horror, and it even utilizes the more modern idea of the Slenderman-like being by way of the "Crooked man". In the end, the story is a mess.
The film begins with the Warrens' investigation into the Amityville haunting (an admitted hoax) and even this feels like an unnecessary start. While it sets up the film's supposed antagonist, it treads too much upon deeply explored horror territory (much like the problems its predecessor had with The Exorcist). From here the film fumbles and tumbles from jump scare to jump scare in typical fashion of its director. The problem this time around though, is that the scares are not even masterfully executed the way they had been in The Conjuring. As one angry reviewer put it, "There's only so many times an audience is going to jump at a door being slammed in the night."
Another reason why The Conjuring was successful in what it tried to accomplish was its very minimalistic feel in regards to its specters. Ghosts were hardly shown, and when they were barely any makeup effects seemed to be used. The Conjuring 2, perhaps given a larger budget, trudged in the opposite direction in regards to this. Its antagonist, a demonic nun, is shown in its complete entirety every time it is seen (starting from the first few moments of the film). By doing this, the villain loses its power to scare the audience effectively throughout the picture. The film's other villains are also completely ineffective. The spirit of an old man looks nothing more than a grumpy old man that your family invites over for holidays out of obligation, and the Slenderman doppelganger, the Crooked man, is so poorly executed, the CGI used to construct him looks cheap, rubbery, and like something from a Roger Corman produced Syfy original movie. It's a cheap move, is poorly executed, and when it's all said and done it is disrespectful to the film's audience.
The actors do an okay job, but even Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson seem like they are simply going through the motions at this point - as if their hearts aren't really behind these performances. The film drags and this doesn't help, allowing more time for the audience to pick up on this lack of enthusiasm given to their roles. (The hokey Elvis impersonation by Patrick Wilson is cringe-worthy).
Perhaps the most interesting aspect in regards to the film is its examination of these "true" ghost stories as hoaxes. At one point, Ed and Lorraine Warren are on a TV talk show to discuss the Amityville haunting with a professor who calls them out as supporters of this fraud. It clearly makes the Warrens (although, Ed more than Lorraine) uncomfortable and adds an interesting level of reality to the film: the everyday conversation of do ghosts exist, and are people like the Warrens simply there to exploit people of their fears for their own fame? This is somewhat later brought up again through Franka Potente's character, also a paranormal investigator, who tries to expose the main case as being a fraud. Unfortunately, this subplot is swept away in both circumstances as quickly as it is brought up. The story might have been much more fascinating if this debate had been its focal point.
Demonic nuns (by way of The Devils or Demonia), creepy old men (by way of almost every Stephen King story), a cheap, rubbery, CGI ripoff of the Slenderman, performances delivered without any enthusiasm, and a fragmented and uninteresting ghost story are the ultimate downfall of James Wan's highly anticipated sequel: The Conjuring 2. Viewers looking for cheap thrills will leave more than likely satisfied with this two hour Frankenstein's monster of a film. Horror and genre aficionados, however, will leave with a very dreadful air of dissapointment.
3.5/10
