The Conjuring 2 (2016) User Reviews

A rare horror sequel that delivers the same quality scares as its predecessor, courtesy of returning puppeteer James Wan.

[lnvicta · 8/10 · 14 October 2016]

The Conjuring was a shocking horror film. It combined every creepy trope you can think of (ghosts, dolls, music boxes, mirrors, you name it), and it actually worked thanks to a genre-savvy director behind the curtains. James Wan has proved himself a capable producer on projects such as Saw and Insidious, and with The Conjuring, he cemented himself as a master of the genre. It had the perfect amalgam of horror tropes crafted in such a way that felt as fresh and spine-tingling as classic haunted house movies did in the '80s. The Conjuring 2 is another "based on true events" tale that has us follow expert paranormal investigators, the Warrens, this time solving the mystery of the Enfield Haunting.

Similar to the Amityville Haunting, the Enfield Haunting sees an English family plagued with a poltergeist that doesn't seem to enjoy the presence of anyone in the house. What The Conjuring 2 succeeds at is giving us both character development and another great story, which is exactly what a good sequel should do. The acting is uniformly great, but the true star of the film is James Wan. His shots are designed in a way to imbue dread and stir it around our heads for a while before hitting us with the scare. That's what true horror lacks these days, patience. The longer the anticipation is built and the more atmosphere is created, the more unsettling the situation becomes until it's like a ticking time bomb that you anxiously wait to go off. It uses familiar tropes, such as self-starting children's toys, slamming doors, and smashing furniture, but they're used as tools to mask the truly frightening fact that this family is up against something utterly beyond their control - they're hopeless, and we can feel it.

Mind you, The Conjuring 2 isn't without its faults. The runtime is a blatant offender. Pushing the 2-hour mark is never a good idea for a horror film, and some fat definitely could have been trimmed. There are a handful of cheap scares, audio scares to be precise - when the music gets extremely loud all of a sudden and you find yourself more annoyed than scared, quickly reaching for the remote to turn the volume down at the risk of enduring another ear drum shattering noise. It also doesn't feel as unique as its predecessor, understandably due to the very nature of sequels, but there are moments that drag on long enough to remind you that the first Conjuring didn't have these plodding plot points. For example, it takes about an hour for the Warrens to even get to England. Also, while in the haunted house, they're able to sleep through some horrifying sounds that would snap a bear right out of hibernation. But these dull spots and plot inconsistencies are few and far between.

The Conjuring 2 is how a horror sequel should be done. It's slick, stylish, fun, and at times, quite terrifying. When a horror movie makes me want to turn on the lights as I go roaming around the house at night, I consider that a job well done. The Conjuring 2, well done.

An uncommonly strong sequel

[mungflesh · 8/10 · 2 June 2016]

The Conjuring 2 doesn't waste time in bringing the scares in. By that, I mean you're pretty much in the thick of it from the get-go, being given some background (via another very notorious haunting incident) for what is to follow.

The Warrens are sent on behalf of the church to investigate some paranormal activity which is whipping up a media storm in Enfield, England and, as per the first movie, they go and attempt to work their magic on the situation. Once again, a family is being haunted and they fear for their sanity and lives. There are a few new twists this time round, so all does not play out as before - but it's not a complete departure from the format, which might have made it a bit more gripping in places.

James Wan's trademark visual style is repeated in this movie - his bag of tricks sometimes yielding a sense of deja vu but generally working like a charm. When it's intended to scare, it really does. The scares come a bit more frequently than in the first movie and do manage to build a lot of tension, even if you've seen the original, so well done to Wan for that.

What's really enjoyable about this movie, is its nostalgic recreation of 70s England. Wan has really done a great job of this, which is surprising given that he's not from there. Also, the central support role of Janet Hodgson is pretty crucial to empathising with the Enfield family and Madison Wolfe gives a solid performance.

It's arguable this one is as strong as the first. I really enjoyed it and would recommend it to anyone who enjoyed part one, or indeed likes movies of a haunting or possession theme.

Some awesome, unsettling and creepy music in places too.

The Conjuring 2 is best when it sticks to the basics

[AgentDice · 8/10 · 8 June 2016]

First, the all-important question: Is The Conjuring 2 scary? Like, jump out of your seat, watch through your outstretched fingers scary? The answer to that is "yes." Under James Wan's direction, even the most clichéd haunted-house tropes (and this movie is bursting with them) are genuinely creepy, and although the movie isn't overly reliant on jump scares, the ones it does use—well, they work. On a lizard-brain level, The Conjuring 2 taps into the universal childhood fear of the dark, and some of its simplest moments—like a little girl hiding under the covers with a flashlight—are its most effective, bolstered by skillfully executed sound design and Don Burgess' gloomy cinematography.

Speaking of tropes, that's where the "based on a true story" bit comes in. The main plot of the film revolves around a real-life incident known as the Enfield Poltergeist, an extremely well-documented case of a supposed ghost who terrorized the Hodgson family of North London from 1977 to 1979 and was apparently a fan of the classics: knocking on walls, shaking beds, throwing furniture, and even the occasional haunted kid's toy. And as malevolent spirits often do, it picked on one of the children in particular, 11-year-old Janet Hodgson (Madison Wolfe). Call it a collective delusion, or a desperate cry for attention from a disturbed child. Or call it what the movie very explicitly calls it: The Devil.

With this installment, the Conjuring movies may have overtaken The Exorcist as the most Christian of horror franchises, taking place in a universe where the Catholic Church is the spiritual S.H.I.E.L.D. and demon hunters Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine Warren (Vera Farmiga) its holy roller super-agents. The film opens with the Warrens investigating the famous Amityville case, during the course of which Lorraine first encounters the hellish presence that will haunt her for the next few years. Fearing for his life, she begs her husband to suspend any future paranormal investigations, to which he reluctantly agrees. Until, that is, a priest arrives to give them their next mission: Travel to London and confirm the veracity of reports of a demonically tinged haunting.

Both Farmiga and Wilson are given their chance to shine in spooky set pieces—Farmiga early on in the film, Wilson later. But while they're both convincing in spiritual warrior mode, Wan's decision to play up the romance between the two doesn't quite work. We knew that the Warrens were a happily married couple in the first movie, but having them each individually tell the story of their paranormal love and Ed make suggestive comments about the sleeping arrangements seems odd, maybe because they're flirting in front of a possessed pre-teen whose soul is currently in the process of being swallowed by the Pit. (On the other hand, this is just another day at the office for the Warrens.) The non-horror elements of the film are uneven in general: The score, so effective in the fright scenes, suddenly evokes eye rolls when things start to get sentimental, and there's one scene of unintentional comedy where the film's retro '70s setting—another element downplayed in the first film but foregrounded here—collides with its demonic imagery in an honestly pretty silly way. (The Conjuring 2 shares its predecessor's eye for period details, some of which seem out-and-out ridiculous until they're juxtaposed with photos of their real-life counterparts in the end credits. The on-the-nose pop music gets no such redemption.) That being said, there are also some truly funny moments, like a shot of the Hodgson family running from their haunted house after a particularly intense bout of psychokinetic activity that riffs on smartasses' favorite retort, "Why don't they just move?" (And, for the record, they don't move because it's public housing, and the local council, which is naturally quite skeptical of the whole "ghost" thing, has to approve the relocation.) It's also worth noting that The Conjuring 2 is more than two hours long, allowing for lots of escalation. And while each individual haunting scene can be white-knuckle intense, by the dozenth or so such shock, the film starts to lose momentum. So the final confrontation, when it does come, is a relief in more ways than one. The long running time also allows Wan to overthink his demonology: The main villain, an infernal nun, is appropriately nightmarish, if reminiscent of the veiled "Bride In Black" from Wan's own Insidious. What's less compelling is the insertion of the "Crooked Man," a storybook scarecrow monster that starts spreading Babadook-esque chaos about halfway through and is explained as the demon assuming a form that's familiar to the Hodgsons. Which would be fine, if it weren't for the two familiar forms that the spirit has taken already.

When The Conjuring 2 focuses its efforts on scaring the audience, it succeeds, wildly. And why wouldn't it? Wan's got his horror technique locked down at this point. It's the parts where it wanders away from the basics of creating and releasing tension that prevent it from outdoing its predecessor.

A Rare Sequel That Improves on the Original

[Michael_Elliott · 12 October 2016]

The Conjuring 2 (2016)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

Ed and Lorraine Warren (Patrick Wilson, Vera Farmiga) are coming off the Amityville case when they decide to take a break. This break doesn't last too long as Ed has a vision of a possessed nun, which is the same person Lorraine previously saw. Meanwhile over in London a mother and her four children are being haunted by an evil spirit, which appears to be attached to an elderly man.

THE CONJURING came out of nowhere and become a huge hit among critics and horror fans. The box office numbers meant a sequel was bound to follow since the number one rule with horror films is that if one makes money you rush another into production. Thankfully this film wasn't rushed into production and it's great that they actually took their time to deliver a good screenplay. I must admit that I'm quite shocked but I thought the film was much better and much creepier than the first film.

Director James Wan is really becoming an expert at these types of films and this here is certainly among the best that has been made. I thought the first film was quite good due to its performances and a nice story but I didn't find a single thing creepy. That certainly wasn't the case here as the movie had my blood turning cold several times including the before mentioned nun, which was downright creepy at times. I also thought the first hour was perfectly done as the director slowly builds up the suspense and once it hits he just keeps it going with one sequence after another. I will say that the "crooked man" didn't work and the finale wasn't as great as I was hoping but these are just small issues.

Once again the film really benefits from the two great leads performances. Both Wilson and Farmiga are perfectly believable in their roles and they certainly sell the viewer that everything you're watching is actually happening. Madison Wolfe and Frances O'Connor are also very good in their supporting roles as is Simon McBurney. The film also benefits from some terrific cinematography and a very eerie music score. On a technical level the film is very impressive and this here helps build up the atmosphere.

THE CONJURING 2 is a very rare sequel that actually manages to be much better than the first film. It also shows why sequels shouldn't be rushed into production and that if you take your time with them something as good as this can be made.

Clever enough to scare us

[n-kefala · 7/10 · 9 June 2016]

"The Conjuring 2" is an excellent example of what more sequels should aspire to be. It is a perfectly executed haunting movie from James Wan that dives deep below the surface to explore themes of vision, belief and faith. The family drama is still right at the center and is quite effective, and Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson are excellent to their roles. The film doesn't give anything new at the horror movie genre, but its set pieces are often impressive, even if sometimes rely a bit on jump scares. The truth is that "The Conjuring 2" has enough suspense and story to have appeal for all kinds of horror fans and is a film clever enough to scare us. nikisreviews.com

The supernatural conjured

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 7 October 2018]

Decided to re-watch both 'The Conjuring' films, with memories of really liking both, after watching, and not liking all that much, 'The Nun' (which was watched as part of my watching as many films of 2018 as possible quest) very recently. Just to see whether they held up, as good as remembered and whether they succeeded where 'The Nun' didn't and didn't make that film's mistakes.

On re-watch, 'The Conjuring 2', like its very good predecessor, does hold up very well and actually just as good as remembered. It succeeds splendidly in where 'The Nun' failed and has none of its mistakes. 'The Conjuring 2', like its predecessor, is not a perfect film, but it is very atmospheric, well made and genuinely scary, or at least to me it was. It is a very familiar premise, done to death actually, but the atmosphere stops it from being too predictable and there is enough freshness. As a sequel, it fares very well and one of not many to actually be on the same level as its predecessor.

'The Conjuring 2' is overlong, which is its biggest issue. This would have been rectified by 20 minutes being trimmed and the pace of the first act, with a beginning that doesn't attention-grab or unsettle as it should have done, tightened up.

Other than those, 'The Conjuring 2' is very good. It looks great, especially for horror films released in recent years (too many of which have looked like they were made on the schlocky cheap). It looks slick and stylish while having a spooky setting and suitably nightmarish lighting. The music is haunting and not over-bearing, recorded in a way that is not overly loud or obvious that it spoils the atmosphere (which was great because many horror films seen recently failed in this regard).

Script is not too awkward and is structured coherently, with nothing cheapening it like sluggish exposition or cheesy misplaced humour. The direction is meticulous in detail and clearly shows an engagement and ease with the material. The story takes time to unfold but doesn't get dull once it gets going, while the ending is leagues better, much more momentum and the resolution didn't feel rushed. As said too, 'The Conjuring 2' yet again is genuinely scary, with actual tension, suspense and dread, in a palm-sweating and heart-pounding sense at its best, while not relying too much on jump scares (they are there but have build up and were surprising).

Found myself liking the characters more than expected. The leads were ones worth caring for, didn't get frustrated with them, wish for more personality or annoyed by them. The antagonist was frightening, was neither over-used or under-utilised and didn't look cheap. The acting also comes off well, especially Vera Farmiga who is superb, Patrick Wilson is even better here, while also impressed with how Frances O'Connor coped with a role that on paper seemed limited.

Summarising, very good. 8/10 Bethany Cox

A sequel deserving of being made

[Brandon_Walker_Robinson · 7/10 · 7 June 2016]

For the most part, I came out with a positive vibe with the film. Production-wise, I thought it was exceptionally well done, and coming off the original one I can definitely say this held its own very well. Sequels have this innate ability to overdo what the previous installment did, and one might say this did it in some sense, but for the most part it played with a dialed-back approach. I mean look, what am I supposed to say about a film that is supposedly based on a true story? Sure, they will take their liberties here and there regarding what to make happen and how, but if they say it happened what am I to do in telling them they're doing what happened wrong or overly much? It was the right amount of "more done."

In my opinion alone (which will not be consistent with everybody here), the first hour was terrifying (depends on what one considers scary). The crowd interacted with the film appropriately, and the actors on screen did their due diligence to make you fearful for their well-being. Pacing-wise, the second hour took a strange turn. I was fine with what they did by creating more of a slow-burn effect to build up to a large climax, but considering there wasn't much to be considered scary in the second hour, it kind of felt like we got slow-burn for nothing (the end punch was fine, just not nearly as frightening as anything in the first hour is all). I can't really explain it. That's okay I guess, but I'm sure this film ran over two hours long, and I think the most appropriate cut would have been about right at two hours. I was only slightly fatigued by the end of it all.

James Wan has a terrific eye for the horror genre, and likes to display an array of emotions in his films, especially comedy where needed. Nothing slapstick at all, just the perfect blend of realism like "This is how a person acts in real life," something that Christopher Nolan has never been able to do himself. The characters aren't just pieces to tell a larger story, they are the story. Patrick Wilson is silently one of my favorite actors, often taking the non-blockbuster role but still holding his own in a natural way. I have only seen Vera Farmiga in a few films now (The Departed, Orphan, Up in the Air, Source Code, Safe House, and The Conjuring), and with every scene she is in, she just encapsulates me. I would love to sit down and have a dinner conversation with her, if you know what I mean.

Compared to the first film I'd say this resorted with a few more jump scares, but I'm going to credit Wan for not cheapening them and doing them where they fit (no kids scaring each other, etc). This film did not play with the "less is more" mantra as much as the first film though, but like I said I'll go with that in a sequel. The first one also had much more even pacing and left with the right amount of questions unanswered; not to be unfair with this, but I also "believe" the story of the first film more than this one (only regarding what was seen on the screen). However, in The Conjuring 2 I cared more about this family, and I think the tension was equally as good in this film, save the night scenes being just a little too well-lit for my taste. I'd say I might like the first one just a little bit more, at least in that I own the first one on Blu-ray and I don't know if I need this one immediately.

Oh, and just be aware that the official trailer reveals way too much. I'm not even talking about jump scare material (which it does overdo), but I mean story material. Avoid please! Watch the teaser trailer instead, that one is perfect and reveals nothing substantial. Also make sure you stay for the first billing credits sequence at the end of the movie just because of how well it is crafted, as was the film itself! If only they cut out 10 minutes and maybe even $10 million in the budget, I think it would have served its purpose a little more appropriately. Unlike Sinister 2 though, this film didn't disappoint in the slightest.

Wow!!

[m-shellby · 10/10 · 8 June 2016]

Wow wow wow!! I've never been much of a fan of sequels but The Conjuring 2 was incredible. I'm never one to jump at everything 'scary' I see in movies as usually you've seen it all before & let's be honest, nothing really scares you much when your not a teenager anymore. However The Conjuring had me jumping all over the place. At one point I even yelped, much to my embarrassment, but that's why we go to horror movies! To be scared & the conjuring didn't disappoint. All actors gave amazing performances & the story had you never in a state of boredom. Walking out of the cinema I couldn't wait to see what The Conjuring 3 would bring! (Assuming we're lucky enough for another). Definitely a movie to see in the cinema. I give it 10/10!! Great movie!!

Not half bad!

[BandSAboutMovies · 6/10 · 16 February 2020]

The second cinematic film in the Warren cinematic universe, this movie starts where other movies like The Amityville Horror take hours to show. Yes, the Warrens really did go to 112 Ocean Avenue. The jury is, however, out as to whether Lorraine had a vision of the murders, followed the ghost of one of the Lutz children into the basement and then met Valak the Nun, who would go on to be in her own series of movies.

The ghost boy is based on the infamous Amityville photo - you know the one, it wasn't shown until years later when the first movie was on its PR tour.

The movie then moves on to another paranormal case, the Enfield haunting of 1977. Janet Hodgson - while sleepwalking - would speak in the voice of an angry elderly man. The Warrens are determined to save her and her family, while Lorraine is concerned that Ed will be killed.

In addition to introducing the Nun character, this movie also has an appearance by the Crooked Man, who will obviously soon get his own Conjuring universe movie, alongside Annabelle (Annabelle, Annabelle: Creation, Annabelle Comes Home) and La Llorona (The Curse of La Llorona).

I was happy to see Franka Potente in a movie. She was such a force in Run Lola Run and its a shame she isn't in more movies. Here, she plays Anita Gregory, a real-life scientist who was a member of the Society for Psychical Research that investigated the Enfield Haunting.

This was directed by James Wan, who always adds a layer of sheen and class to his horror proceedings. He's learned a ton since the Saw films and hey - I even like his silly slasher film, Dead Silence. It was written by the team of Wan, David Leslie Johnson (Aquaman, Orphan) and the twin writing team of Chad and Carey Hayes. Interestingly enough, Chad was in Death Spa in his younger days.

I also love the art direction in the Conjuring films. The Warren's study is filled with mystical artifacts from their many adventures, like the golden upside-down skull from Vice Versa that caused Judge Reinhold and Fred Savage to switch bodies. There's also a great poster of a young Joanna Lumley from Absolutely Fabulous in the girls' room. You can also spot a poster for Exorcist II: The Heretic in the montage of England set to The Clash's "London Calling."

Also, just so there's no debate, beyond being a possession movie, an Amityville movie and a movie about situations based on real-life events, this is also a Christmas movie!

great horrorverse

[SnoopyStyle · 8/10 · 20 August 2017]

It's 1976. Ed (Patrick Wilson) and Lorraine Warren (Vera Farmiga) investigate the Amityville house. After the incident, they are attacked for participating in a hoax. Lorraine is haunted by the nun and visions of Ed's death. She convinces him to stop. Meanwhile in London, the Hodgson family is suffering from a haunting. Peggy Hodgson (Frances O'Connor) is a single mom with four kids. Janet, the 11 year old, is possessed by the spirit intermediately. As more incidents occur and a media crisis gather, the church calls in the Warrens.

At its core, this is a simple haunted house horror. There are a few good horror moves but by itself, it's not that special. The Warrens make it special. They have create a compelling horror universe. Lorraine and the nun have a great nightmare scene. The best is Lorraine having a heart to heart with Janet. They make all the difference.

The Nun and Crooked Man were unnecessary

[yoshimasu_k · 6/10 · 27 February 2023]

The Conjuring felt so grounded, making it all the more terrifying. I was expecting the same from this sequel, but the over-the-top scenes with the Nun and Crooked Man really made me hesitant to finish watching (forced additions by the studio to push The Conjuring "universe"?).

I'm glad that I continued watching, though, because Ed Warren's first interaction with the demon speaking through Janet was masterfully done... aaaaand of course they had to bring the Nun and Crooked Man back... and the hanging on to the curtains for dear life... I... I just can't.

I wanted The Conjuring 2 to be so much more considering the director AND writers returned, but it just ended up feeling like another cash-grab sequel to push a "cinematic universe." James Wan is one of my favorite horror directors and I remember Insidious: Chapter 2 being pretty good, so this was unfortunately a huge disappointment.

This one still haunts me

[nogodnomasters · 8/10 · 27 November 2017]

We continue on with the paranormal adventures of Ed (Patrick Wilson ) and Lorraine (Vera Farmiga) Warren of Amityville fame. They are asked to go to Enfield and investigate a haunting or poltergeist case centering around Janet Hodgson (Madison Wolfe) and the spirit of Bill.

The film is filled with jump scares, whispers, screams, etc. enough to make it enjoyable.

Much of the film follows reported incidents (a bit exaggerated) and the criticism and skepticism of the time (and today). Claims that Janet did the pranks and practiced ventriloquism as well as being caught red handed faking incidents are included in the feature.The film makers took liberties with reports such as the police report that a chair wobbled from side to side, became a chair moving across the room. The role of Ed and Lorraine was minor and I would suggest the reason why they never wrote about it was that until the last half hour of the film, they deemed it a hoax and that last part was Hollywood writers earning their dime. As an entertaining Poltergeist film, it is all that. As to being factual, there have been other films and features on Enfield that are far less horrific and supernatural.

Go watch the film for a good scare for the kids, not a docudrama.

Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity.

Take....My..... Hand.....

[wandernn1-81-683274 · 6/10 · 5 April 2021]

This to me is a very slow burner. I've watched it like 4 times and I think this time, the 5th time, I've enjoyed it the most. I think the relationship / connection that Wilson and Farmiga have on screen is fantastic.

Other than that the movie is pretty cheesey. Especially with how they wrap up the case. 6/10.

Very overplayed and not scary!

[tomasstanger · 3/10 · 19 September 2016]

Amazing how little of what actually happened is shown in the film, according to any documentary or article on the film, instead they try and make it more 'action packed' and thus totally unrealistic.

Interesting that you'd think with all the noise and shouting going on there that at least one of the neighbours would have gone outside to at least find out what was going on. That would have probably killed what little suspense there was though.

Now I did enjoy the first one and I don't blame the producers of these films for employing some 'artistic licence' as the stories in themselves aren't particularly exciting as they are fascinating. In fact the original stories are far more engrossing than these films.

Sadly with this film they've decided to continue with the non scary looking ghost routine and somewhat OTT with the effects when playing on peoples senses is far more effective a medium to scare people without the need for pointless special effects and overplaying on 'action' scenes that bear no familiarity to the actual story, adds nothing to the film and makes the finished output look a bit silly

More like Insidious 4

[kukikid · 6/10 · 14 June 2016]

I absolutely love the first Conjuring movie. When I watch that movie, it gets under my skin. I actually feel troubled and somewhat terrible after watching it. I rank the first movie rather high. It bothers me almost as much as the Exorcist does. I don't even like to watch it at night. The feeling of dread in that movie is heavy. In the sequel, my patience was challenged a bit. It plays out like a sampler of far better films such as Poltergeist and The Evil Dead. It's fun for what it is: a popcorn movie. If you enjoy fun ghost movies, see this one. If you're expecting a movie on the level of the first Conjuring, you may find yourself a bit disappointed.

Great movie, better than the first one.

[sivretta · 10/10 · 3 June 2016]

I was really surprised about what an amazing job James Wan did with this sequel. From the very start it captures you and keeps you attached to the screen. There is no way you can get bored. I loved the suspense that goes increasing pretty quickly through the whole film, I could feel my heart in my ears beating faster as the atmosphere grew creeper and creeper. I enjoyed all the small details threw around such as the name of the demon that was showed in the Warren's house more than once in the background, leaving me with the question "Why that word keeps being repeated? Nobody in that house has that name!" only at the end I figured out what it meant. I absolutely adored the whole plot and the plot twist within. Make up and special effects were crazy, they made you get chills running down your spine. The soundtrack was impeccable, it played a big part in creating the right atmosphere. Few jump scares, very well situated, some of them very unpredictable. Didn't see a couple of them coming, at all. I found that Vera Farmiga was absolutely stunning with her performance in this movie. I loved the way Lorraine had her "moment" when stepping in to save her husband condemning the demonic entity back to hell. She was incredibly intense. Personally, I think Patrick Wilson did a better job in this movie compared to the first. I felt like Ed and his relationship with Lorraine was a lot more highlighted. I highly recommend this movie. If you are a fan of the paranormal you can't miss it.

Not the greatest sequel.

[0U · 22 February 2020]

After watching this movie I can say that no it is not as good as the original but that does mean that it is a bad movie. What I was really excited to see in this movie from the trailers was the scares and the demon nun Valak. The movie does not disappoint and can't wait to see the next entry in the conjuring series!

Left a lot to be desired...

[utslitt · 6/10 · 5 July 2019]

After immediately watching this after the first Conjuring film, I found myself ridiculously let down. It pales in comparison and even stand alone it's quite unbearably boring for the first half of the movie. It's a shame this wasn't handled with more care as the storyline itself showed major potential.

Once we reached the second half of the film where the possession has reached its climax and things are truly discovered to be how they are, the film finally begins to glisten in all its glory. It was truly a shame the encounters before this point weren't handled as well as they were in this moment.

Definitely scarier than the first!

[jdogkg · 9/10 · 14 June 2016]

I was really counting on this movie to raise my scare level to the top, and if you haven't seen this movie, you have no idea what I am talking about! Oh my gosh, this film was freaking terrifying! For three years I was plagued with nightmares of the first movie, and i didn't think any movie could be more scary. Conjuring 2 definitely proved me wrong! Not only were there jump scares but REAL horror, not just being startled by a loud noise but James Wan shows us what real horror is. There were many rising suspense scenes and you have no idea what will happen. That is what scary is! Demons are what true scariness are. What lurks in the darkness is something to be terrified about. And this movie shows us this perfectly. Like I said it does have jump scares, and I appreciated that, why? BECAUSE NONE IF THEM ARE FALSE, they were not a cat jumping out or a character popping out, every single one was real and lived up to the rising suspense that was built up. Not only is it scary but it is an awesome story. As a matter of fact a TRUR STORY. It was very well told and unlike most horror movies today it actually had a PLOT. The twist in the end is brilliant, unpredictable and pieced together the plot elements well. Also greatly shot, greatly acted and great character development. Unlike most horror movies this has Likable CHARACTERS. Unlike most horror movies it's not a gore fest or has countless swear words, it's rated R JUST because of how SCARY it is. I love James Wan he is terrific at what he does. Every horror director now days NEEDS to see the insidious trilogy and of course the 2 conjuring movies. This has restored my faith in horror movies! I definitely recommend it. See it with your spouse, friends, girlfriend or boyfriend (definitely do not bring your kids) and you will have the thrill of a lifetime! By the way you might want to look under your bed tonight! 😉

Some OK parts but gets away from itself with terrible ideas for scares.

[robdeceased · 6/10 · 26 November 2016]

The Conjuring was a pretty dark and serious affair which always stayed pretty grounded in it's attempts to create a spooky atmosphere and keep the scares natural rather than obnoxious. The Conjuring 2 is pretty much the opposite of that during the second act.

Based on a 'true' event widely known as one of the most legitimate paranormal occurrences, C2 is set around the strange happenings to a fatherless family living in a quaint house in England. This set up is interesting at first as it starts off with poltergeist activity before graduating to full blown possession of a young girl. Before long the family enlists the help of the ghost hunter psychic lady from the first movie and her husband who, is being haunted himself by the ghost/demon taking the form of a nun with bad makeup.

Where this movie starts losing ground is around the second act, where the bigger scares are supposed to come they start to rely too much on almost cartoonish visuals instead of natural scares and 'realistic' poltergeist activity, which leaves the movie looking extremely silly in my opinion. When a movie goes from a TV switching channels on it's own to a giant spindly man straight out of 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' it kinda loses it's appeal to me.

The movie is watchable, but I wouldn't watch it again willingly as I feel there's nothing to gain from a second viewing.

The Conjuring 2 Review

[burnham-42353 · 9/10 · 12 June 2016]

The Conjuring 2 is directed by James Wan and stars Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson. The Conjuring 2 is an excellent horror movie and just a flat out great movie in general. From the camera-work to the performances this movie delivers on all fronts. The plot follows a family in poverty in Einfield,England that start experiencing strange happenings in their home. After things become much worse over a period of time The Warrens are contacted to come and help. This is a very scary movie thanks to James Wan's direction from lingering and tracking shots he is truly a master behind the camera. The scares come quite often as scenes will linger and bring a huge sense of tension and get you when your not expecting it bringing some very frightening scenes. Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilsons performances are excellent as you buy into their relationship and learn some lessons on marriage. The children actors have the be given credit too as they are great in this film. These kids are terrified of the haunting and you will feel their dread. I am so satisfied with this film generally people worry about horror sequels usually because they can turn out unsuccessful, but I am happy to report as a big fan of the first movie this is just as great.

Jump Scares and very little else

[donquixotewillbe · 6/10 · 19 June 2016]

Being a huge fan of the horror genre, one must be disappointed with the quality of movies being churned out by "Hollywood" in the last 4-5 years. Conjuring was one of the exceptions, albeit partially. It managed an effective combination of jump scares and build-up. I, for one, love the horror genre, not for the former but the latter. Extensive experience in this genre has trained us well on the wheres, hows and whats and hence, build-up is what should matter most.

It is extremely disappointing to see the extent to which jump scares were employed by the makers having established themselves in the 'true story' mould with the first movie. They even aped camera angles adopted in the documentaries on the Enfield haunting, for crying out loud!

I was distraught when I read somewhere that the nun sequences were added as an afterthought. Wonder if the movie would have been better without these scenes?!

The Elvis part, bad. The climax, worse. The unwanted VFX, worst.

Hoping for a better 'true story' with the next installment.

Gerne-bending, ground-breaking and an absolute classic

[KhangNg19 · 10/10 · 8 June 2016]

The thing about The Conjuring series is that it screams classic right at the first few scenes and just works its way up from there. While The Conjuring is definitely being remembered as one of the most excellent horror movies in decades, its sequel does even a better job by providing some extra well-done scenes that are not normally seen within the gerne.

But how about the scare part? Is it scary? Definitely yes. Don't bother comparing it to the first one. Just enjoy the movie and you will find yourself holding your breath until the very last moment.

Vera Farmiga was superb. Her presence was so strong, and powerful that she managed to pull the viewer through all kind of emotions. Patrick Wilson was also wonderful indeed. There are some subtle little hints about a sequel here and there in the movie. If those two continues to star (and also with James Wan), there is no doubt that it would be another masterpiece.

Based On The Enfield Haunting.

[meddlecore · 6/10 · 24 November 2020]

For a modern ghost film...this is pretty damn good!

It is loosely based off of the true story of the Enfield haunting- which is one of the most documented cases of poltergeist activity in the world.

The filmmakers do a pretty good job at staying true to the story- with the whole nun-demon angle tied in for dramatic purposes.

Unfortunately, for this case, it became a media frenzy.

They brought in kooks, psychics, and ultra-skeptics, alike...and made the whole thing a total crapshow.

The whole story begins around Christmas 1977, when a girl named Janet- and her family- start to be tormented by an unseen entity.

Janet starts sleepwalking; beds shake inexplicably; and, eventually, Janet starts to speak with the voice of an old man.

She claims he is Bill Wilkins, who died in the chair in the corner, from a hemorrhage, at 72 years of age.

Information that is later corroborated by the former owners son.

Not only do her siblings and mother witness these strange occurrences...but a local police constable, daily mirror reporter, and Maurice Grosse, from the Society Of Psychical Research, do as well.

And, eventually, the Church is called in.

They send a couple of their own investigators in to judge the veracity of these claims. As the Church does not want to embarrass itself by involving itself in a fraudulent case.

The film ties this into one of their previous investigations- with the woman (who's a psychic) having had a premonition that seems to be coming to fruition here.

And they try to help the spirit of Bill Wilkins cross over.

But it becomes evident to them, that the force behind this activity is not actually the spirit of Bill...rather, something much more demonic in origin.

Cue the spiritual battle between the Church investigators and this demonic nun-entity.

For the most part, this is a pretty great film.

Well written and constructed...it really manages to keep you engaged.

Coming off as The Entity meets The Exorcist.

Though, the ending gets a little too Paranormal Activity for me.

While more tastefully done than Paranormal Activity...it has some similarities...though, I kind of liked how they wrapped things up (seeing as I have a demon haunted painting, myself)...

6 out of 10.

Genre saturation Showcase.

[ferna_oe · 3/10 · 12 June 2016]

Don't take me wrong. I did not hate The conjuring 2. It is an enjoyable film, in many terms. But I need to stress out, that this is one of the many films that have come lately, which is absolutely all about selling the product. The Hype. The anticipation. The goal of the producers lies 1 second after the ticket is sold, and not quite 1 second after the film is over. The conjuring 2 takes its context out of a very documented paranormal case which took place in England in 1977. It narrates the story of a family of 5, single mom, and 4 children, which are tormented by a spirit, and who eventually, get to be assisted by experts-in-these-topics Ed and Loraine Warren.

The premise might not be original at all, but it still works. The problem comes when such a premise is used at an attempt to pull off an over 2 hours long feature film.

About 30 minutes in, you will start to notice that this film is desperate. It is desperate to make you scared and live up to its own trailers and expectations. It might succeed on some (mostly children under 14 who sneaked inside the theater or whose irresponsible parents lied about their age at the ticket booth). But seasoned horror film enthusiasts will be able to anticipate almost every single jump-scare or even take a leap of faith and predict the outcome of a whole scene. Why? Because everything that happens in the conjuring 2, you have already seen or experienced in other films. This is the type of film you can watch with a notebook and start checking those clichés as they appear. The effort through which the writers struggled to come out with anything barely original or "never seen" before is noticeable, and every time they fail. Now considering this film is 110+min long, you will get tired quickly of hearing a loud noise, the a scream, and the some generic paranormal door slam, or furniture dash, because it happens a lot, and it get old a lot faster.

Don't get me wrong. It is not a trash film. Production values alone are worth the ticket. The film is beautifully filmed, in dark and ominous colors, and the house looks stunning even in almost 95% darkness. The music is interesting and tense, and the acting is top notch. (And the vile nun got myself quite convinced it was Marilyn Manson) But if you're there for the technical specs of it, you could have gone to other place to watch Citizen Kane.

It saddens me a little, to be witness of the decadence of the horror genre. Where most of the production money goes towards jump-scare roller-coaster rides like this one. The recipe for box office success was found, and they just keep making the same cake with different glazing. You will probably notice that before the film even starts, when you see that 4 trailers, and then you cannot make the difference between the 4 generic horror movies you've been shown. Probably you won't even be able to recall the names of the films. Because it doesn't matter. 3 stars. Enjoyable overall, but terribly generic.