Read Mixed User Reviews for The Conjuring 2

6

stellarnomadJul 28, 2016

I usually like to take a mediator approach in all things: a recognition that there is always two, or more, sides to everything and you only possess a part of the puzzle. In this case I change my mind.

The Conjuring 2 isn't genius, scary,I usually like to take a mediator approach in all things: a recognition that there is always two, or more, sides to everything and you only possess a part of the puzzle. In this case I change my mind.

The Conjuring 2 isn't genius, scary, interesting, fresh, horrific or any other overblown descriptor people care to toss around so haphazardly. It is, however, a cliched look into a complete non-event that took place in 70's England regarding a poor, single-mother family and some imaginative children desperate for attention.

Why the powers that be chose to revolve this series of films around a dubious duo, known as the Warrens and well known to sceptics, giving them a credibility they don't deserve, is obvious. Plenty of tall tales to fictionalise further based off of their "case studies". Terms such as "based on" and "inspired by" should be taken as Hollywood shorthand for: we take a few of the interesting parts, jazz them up and make up the rest. In this context I would have preferred they simply created a fresh, fictional set of investigators and have them attempt to resolve each of these otherworldly experiences - an updated X-Files, if you will.

That aside, you get a pretty straight forward yarn that gives you several ghosts of the week packed into the one film. The warrens are presented as prettier versions: altruistic, god-fearing, loving people who can't understand why people criticise their work. The family are serviceable as public housing tenants suddenly thrust into creepy events.

Beyond this, I don't have much else to say about the film. I was never scared by the overdone premise, the ghosts were all typical types you've seen before, and the resolution is as absurd as ever--we know its name therefore we win. Aren't we tired of ghosts, zombies, vampires and demons yet? I guess not.

I appreciate this genre for its ability to get under my skin, and provide different perspectives. If done properly it can achieve anything from simmering unease to heart-racing terror, whilst forcing us to focus on issues we would rather not. Horror has long been a vehicle for social commentary, but films like The Conjuring 2 have nothing to say beyond Box Office.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

6

JonZsuJun 17, 2016

What this movie lacks in originality is well compensated by the good performances and the fine pacing of scare. it is the one of most enjoyable horror films of the year. By the way, does the designer of the demons have a thing with Marilyn Manson?

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

4

papadrew7Jun 11, 2016

All of the intelligence and freshness that the first conjuring brought to the horror genre is completely gone. The movie wasn't terrible but its a big disappointment for being a sequel to one of the best horror movies ever made.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

NigmeJul 2, 2016

User score: 7.9 ????!!!!!!!

You must be joking, People!!! The screenplay is so predictable and so boring that even Patrick Wilson & Vera Farmiga are not able to save the movie.
I am extremely disappointed mr. Wan.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

DXDJun 27, 2016

RUBBISH........................... its not scary and no one dies so over hyped the story is good and acting to great just not as scary as the trailers make it out to be

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

NerdConsultantJun 26, 2016

I actually thought this was a fairly decent horror film, though it’s not a classic, like The Witch or It Follows. The major reason being that whereas the first film felt like it was using a lot of the horror tropes to it’s advantage, thisI actually thought this was a fairly decent horror film, though it’s not a classic, like The Witch or It Follows. The major reason being that whereas the first film felt like it was using a lot of the horror tropes to it’s advantage, this film feels like it’s using them as a crutch to cover up the cracks in the script, which I was really beginning to notice. The overall performances are pretty good and it’s a decent made horror film, but I really wish the Conjuring films would not market themselves as based on a true story and I hated the treatment of skeptics in the film and I don’t like the fact that these films are perpetuating the idea of exorcisms being true, a lot of people are not seeking medical help because they believe in exorcisms… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

4

Dal_ReviewedDatAug 31, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Really disappointing.

One thing I think ALL horrors should be, is punchy. A good pace and flow between scares and suspense. The Conjuring 2 managers to have very little fear factor, regardless of some excellent cast members, it just dragged. Being over 2 hours long really made this movie suffer, its 2 1/4 hrs long, and to me that's 45 minutes of drag, and drag it did. By the final seen, i was only shocked that I'd made it to the end, after 30 minutes of considering switching it off.

The story ties up the real-life-haunting's in the UK and US, with the same team from the 1st movie. It has a few jump scares early on, but by the time the "Crooked Man" reveals himself, I was laughing at it. It tries to re-create the unnatural movements of Sadako in the Ring series, which still haunts me, but instead it's like a pantomime villain walking through the house, and is really un-scary. Even my missus was laughing. It felt like the movie had a few concepts which failed to add up. Whilst the acting was fine, the script was often poor.

I maybe sounding harsh on this film, but the last 45 minutes was a true struggle to watch, just through sheer boredom. By the credits I could only conclude that the film was totally up-itself.

Believe me, they'll be a Conjuring 3... and this my friends is why Hollywood horrors are poor. Endless sequals to films that originally performed well, I'm sure most horror fans will watch this, but in comparison to other mainstream horrors of the past few years, such as "It Follows" this failed to scare, get under my skin or entertain… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

papeadojhonJun 25, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The Conjuring 2 is a well-crafted, well-acted, certainly creepy treat for fans of the first movie or horror enthusiasts. But as a fan of art, I have many issues with this movie, 3 in particular:
Mainly, It lacks the realism the first movie worked so hard to get in the camerawork, the excellent acting, the cold-creepy atmosphere, all of it (except for some of the acting) mostly you won't find it here.
The music, in this sequel they added some real music to it and at the beginning it worked (if you watched the movie, you'll know that the music has something to do with the history of the family), but as the movie goes on it felt unnecessary, in the first movie, music wasn't necessary because they added sounds, creepy sounds that helped to create the atmosphere, those sounds are mostly not here.
The villain, in the first movie the villain was the witch, in this sequel the villain is a nun, that was scary, but its presence felt forced, i didn't really get why that nun was there in the house, why it wanted the little girl, why it involved so much with Lorraine coincidentally, who it was (Valak), but it did felt forced.

In my opinion, this sequel is inferior to its predecessor, for many reasons, but, once again, it's nothing close to be a bad movie compared with all of the horror sequels, it added more romance, drama, some comedy, but as the story goes on it can sacrifice some of the main product of the movie, genuine horror.
I recommend it, however, because if you want to see a creepy, well-crafted, and well-acted sequel, you'll get it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

nibbloSep 5, 2016

James Wan is running out of ideas. The only creepy scene was the nun scene and the painting everything else was laughable in it's comic book tones or been there done that. A big step down from his previous movies.
He seriously needs toJames Wan is running out of ideas. The only creepy scene was the nun scene and the painting everything else was laughable in it's comic book tones or been there done that. A big step down from his previous movies.
He seriously needs to either stop making these ghost movies or sit down with a notepad and come up with something really scary instead of relying on jump scares and darkened corners.
Come on James I know you can do it!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

donaldistJun 24, 2016

For a needlessly precise numerical rating: 59/100
"Have you ever been bullied? Well, this demon is like that bully."
Goofy as heck, often in an endearing way, like the above, often in an irritating way. See, a film interpretation of theFor a needlessly precise numerical rating: 59/100
"Have you ever been bullied? Well, this demon is like that bully."
Goofy as heck, often in an endearing way, like the above, often in an irritating way. See, a film interpretation of the Ensfield Poltergeist hoax would work best as a satire, and the film knows that, so it spends much of its runtime trying to subvert the most obviously hoary elements. In fact, the entire film feels like it doesn't want to have anything to do with the Ensfield Haunting, going so far as to spend a significant amount of time to revise the "culprit" of the happenings so that they are scarier. Make up a case, goshdarn it, we already know the Warrens are crackpots!
Anyway, forget all that. This film may not be well-written or structurally sound, but as a string of horror set-pieces, it is darned scary- best of the bunch goes to a slow-burn sequence involving a little boy and a toy fire engine. James Wan was made for these types of films, if anybody is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

SrPepeJul 8, 2018

El Conjuro 2 es una película que no pasa de la media y sinceramente deja mucho que desear.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

KrissTolliday14Oct 23, 2016

Following the cases of Ed and Lorraine Warren, two psychic investigators, this sequel pits the duo against a demonic entity haunting a small Enfield home in London. Despite Lorraine's worry that their jobs put them in harms way, Ed is stillFollowing the cases of Ed and Lorraine Warren, two psychic investigators, this sequel pits the duo against a demonic entity haunting a small Enfield home in London. Despite Lorraine's worry that their jobs put them in harms way, Ed is still eager to save desperate families from their spiritual issues and they are convinced by the church to head to England to assess the Hodgson's case. Is it fact or fiction? This is the question that the film threatens to delve down and if anything is the theme that could be of most interest. It is a different angle to other horror movies and could tip it to being more advanced then your typical scare-fest. However that theme is never developed and the story slowly evolves back into the less original frights. The story is slow moving, with the Warren's failing to really get involved until half way through, and actually isn't really very scary. When we start to unravel what the demon is it becomes a little laughable, making it less terrifying than it should have been. The performance of Madison Wolfe is a saving grace for this problem however. As the possessed child she brings a frightening presence more so than what the demons do. There are many good moments but it never delves as deep as what it should have done. If the Warrens were brought in earlier we could learn more about the family and the demons and understand more of what is disturbing Lorraine Warren, however we have two stories that collide when it is convenient for the plot. Characters are also too slow to react to situations, for instance a screaming toy fire truck fails to wake a house of three sleeping children, and solutions come by too easily, mainly through asking questions. James Wan is well known for his horror entries and to be fair his direction and choice of shots are chilling, however he struggles with the emotional moments. The soft score during these scenes is out of place and off tone. These moments are required but are not helped by being forced home. The Conjuring franchise is a step up from many horror films but this second entry could have gone further and never really does so.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

detrahokieOct 27, 2016

This isn't like a horror movie, I was disappointed with the sequel conjuring, in the middle of the movie until I fell asleep. the way the story was bad, easy to guess and there was a strange scene. Bill Wilkins role very useless and inferiorThis isn't like a horror movie, I was disappointed with the sequel conjuring, in the middle of the movie until I fell asleep. the way the story was bad, easy to guess and there was a strange scene. Bill Wilkins role very useless and inferior to valak role, because she's creepy. some scenes I laugh because the director has not managed to make it super horror scenes. But, I love the cinematography, color gradding and sound effects.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

sunoblakDec 27, 2017

Un claro ejemplo de como intentar crear algo nuevo, hacerlo, y tener como resultado una obra incoherente y nada inmersiva. Literalmente solo hay dos sustos buenos. Veamos que logran cambiar en la película de la monja 2018, si es que quierenUn claro ejemplo de como intentar crear algo nuevo, hacerlo, y tener como resultado una obra incoherente y nada inmersiva. Literalmente solo hay dos sustos buenos. Veamos que logran cambiar en la película de la monja 2018, si es que quieren cambiar algo.
Una película para pasar el rato y avanzar en la saga, no para no soñar, esperemos que sepan avanzar a la hora de desarrollar la historia y carácter de los dos protagonistas y no hacer lo que han hecho en el caso Endfield.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

amheretojudgeDec 13, 2018

Wan's another swing at this supernatural world is short on thrills and humane emotions and more on the glory of the dark gloomy skin

The Conjuring 2 Wan's another swing at this supernatural world is short on thrills and humane emotions andWan's another swing at this supernatural world is short on thrills and humane emotions and more on the glory of the dark gloomy skin

The Conjuring 2

Wan's another swing at this supernatural world is short on thrills and humane emotions and more on the glory of the dark gloomy skin. And armed with that thought in mind, Wan has somehow managed to shuck out the heat from the shady spirits hovering in the house. The structure of the script is familiar, in fact it is arguable a mirror to its predecessor. And just like its first installment, the first half of the act survives upon the smart tricks of Wan's that builds up to the complete breakdown of the haunted family, cornering themselves for desperate measures. But in here unlike the first one, their barely resides an innovating trick for you to be enchanted upon- a little boy playing with his toy is slick though- but what grabs your attention this time is Wan's brilliant camera work that moves with ferocious pace and sensational eye popping perspective that does scare you.

And as far as the other half is concerned, the plot being more personal and emotionally driven for the lead characters, somehow seems physically distant to the case. The perfect host they were in the previous one by being the perfect guest, there is an empty void on that section that no performance could fill in. Speaking of which, as far as Wilson is concerned on being the noble caring protagonist, he is walking the thin line with confidence.

But once again, Farmiga soars above for her underdog character that is brilliantly fabricated as a three dimensional humane character. What is persistently absorbing about this franchise is its malleable mythical tale that it never holds back to dive deep into and plus, this time the procedure it adapts to narrate the case is immensely impressive. The Conjuring 2 is Wan stepping on to his shoes after a long while, just with the lens of superficial eyes.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

FilipeNetoMar 14, 2021

I loved the first movie and honestly had good expectations for this sequel. I don't know if that was what clouded my judgment or not, but the fact is that I was a little disappointed: I was expecting something more that I'm not sure whatI loved the first movie and honestly had good expectations for this sequel. I don't know if that was what clouded my judgment or not, but the fact is that I was a little disappointed: I was expecting something more that I'm not sure what could be, but that never come. However, I admit that the problem may be more in myself than in the film.

The film begins by taking a very brief approach to the Amityville case, which is already quite retold in cinema, as we know. Starting from these initial scenes, we accompany the Warrens, a famous couple of psychic investigators, to the United Kingdom, to investigate the famous Enfield haunting, which has also been previously dramatized. And here begin my questions and doubts: wouldn't it have been better to leave Amityville aside and think of another way to start the film? It doesn't seem that difficult, and it would remove from the film the strange feeling that it wanted to address two supernatural cases at once. And one more thing: after some reading, I realized that the Warrens' has had a very minor participation in the investigation of the Enfield case (which almost everyone today considers to be a forgery). Wouldn't it have been more interesting to address a case that the Warrens had really studied, and that was perhaps not as famous and as clearly false as Enfield's?

Overall, I liked the movie. To say otherwise would be to lie. It is an elegant film, which fulfills what it promises and knows how to present itself as a solid production and stand out from the immensity of low-budget indie films that abound in the horror genre. It also seemed like a worthy successor to the first "The Conjuring" film. But I really lacked something, as I said before. I liked the way it builds tension and the atmosphere of suspense is genuine and solid. However, most scares are predictable and there is not much original. Another problem I felt was the uneven pace and the length of the film. The beginning is too slow, it takes a long time to introduce the story and an infinite amount of time passes before things start to "warm up". Afterwards, everything happens so quickly that we hardly have an opportunity to taste the fear.

Skillfully directed by James Wan, the film retains the participation of Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson from its predecessor. Already familiar with their characters, they do even better than in the first film: Wilson is the one who has evolved and improved the most, but it is still Farmiga who steals the attention and dominates the film, with a great presence and a very competent performance. Frances O'Connor was also very good and professional in her role. Madison Wolfe and Lauren Esposito are also okay. Simon McBurney could have been better, but it seems to me that the script didn't give his character as much attention as the one he really deserved.

At a technical level, it is a film that justifies every cent of its budget: the CGI and the visual and sound effects are the best that was available to Hollywood and works fine, blending perfectly with a cinematography that captures the foggy London environment and loads it with more shadows and darkness whenever it is opportune. The light and the absence of it is, in fact, one of the elements that most helps to build fear in this film, as well as the sound, the sound effects and a subtle and more skillfully designed soundtrack than the one that was used in the first movie. The design of the monsters and demons worked perfectly, especially the nun, and the design of the sets is excellent.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DawdlingPoetNov 24, 2021

I prefer this film to the original, although at first the scariest thing was hearing Margraret Thatcher on TV!. However, it felt a little more authentic and maybe that's partly because its set (or partly set, anyway) in the UK. It has theI prefer this film to the original, although at first the scariest thing was hearing Margraret Thatcher on TV!. However, it felt a little more authentic and maybe that's partly because its set (or partly set, anyway) in the UK. It has the look of The Blair Witch Project about it, with close ups of terrified kids in the pitch dark (at home). I did laugh for a moment at one character called 'Maurice Grosse' too but that's by the by. It did feel a little spookier than the first film, although I wouldn't call either the original film or this one completely scary. There's a bit more of a plot to it and I felt it was more suspenseful and a bit intriguing but I wouldn't say much more than that. Yes, I suppose I'd recommend this to others, especially if you like the demonic/garbled sounding voices coming from possessed kids, as featured in the original film. MWUHAHA! * ahem*.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews