The Conjuring 2

Director James Wan has delivered what should rightfully be considered his masterpiece. There is a breadth and scale of ambition at work, which really tops anything he's tried in the genre before. Most importantly: it's a resounding success.

Wan’s expert deployment of genre jolts is no less in evidence this time around, but as he takes his time — perhaps even a bit too much of it — interweaving the Warrens’ story with that of the Hodgsons, in the London borough of Enfield, he crafts a deep dive into dread. The film builds to a symphonic climax of heaven-and-hell emotion.

What makes The Conjuring 2 play deeper and darker than a warmed-over version of The Exorcist is director James Wan (Saw, Insidious, Furious 7). This Malaysian-born filmmaker can make his camera do terrifying tricks that are almost supernatural.

There are some solid scares (Wan is too gifted in the dark art of gotcha manipulation to not make you leap a few times), but there’s nothing on par with the first film’s brilliant hide-and-clap scene with Lili Taylor. If there’s going to be a Conjuring 3—and this movie is just decent enough to suggest there will be—our heroes should be a little choosier about which case they dust off next.

The Conjuring 2 won't make anyone forget the first film, but it's good enough that you'll hope they make another.

Wan is coming off the world-conquering success of his wildly entertaining automotive action sequel Furious Seven, and he sometimes seems to be trying to bring the splashy cacophony of that movie into a world that thrives on sparseness and focus. It doesn’t work.

If The Conjuring is an example of the haunted house movie done right, The Conjuring 2 is an example of everything gone wrong. You can only retread old tropes so many times.

Emotional, thrilling and haunting Conjuring 2 retains best of part 1 and adds a stronger and horrifying villain for Warrens to battle. James Wan at it’s best.

Improves on the original by going for broke and cramming in as many spooky creatures as it can. Great performance by Madison Wolfe. Valak is tremendously scary and the first set piece with her stalking Lorraine made my skin crawl.

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 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*.

Korku seansı gibi bir filme yakısmiyor 1 in yanindan bile geçemez filmin yarısından fazlasinda dalga komedi ögesi var ciddi bir şey yok korkutucu değildi yalnizca son 20 dk si güzeldi yani izleyeceksiniz sonunu izleyin geri kalan kısmı komedi filmi gibi

This would be a great comedy, but it turns out it's supposed to be a horror movie. The scares are so cheesy and the special effects are so poor that I just couldn't stop myself from laughing. The Conjuring 1 was actually creepy as hell. This one is just bad. I'm really glad I didn't see it in theaters because I'm sure my guffaws would have ruined it for everyone else. The story, moreso than the last movie, is focused on insisting that haunted houses are real, which really killed it for me. It's obvious what really happened - the movie even spells it out for you.