Anyone watched this yet? Seems like one of the better american horror films ever produced tbqh.
>>70737756
Saw it today. Was better done than the original and fairly convincingly acted. Interesting plot, but I suppose that isn't too hard since its "true". Was worth the $6 I paid to see it during matinee. I'd go see another. The demonnun was well done and i felt bad for the old man ghost.
Roll over Carpenter.
Just finished watching it. It had a ton of jumpscares but it did have a more interesting plot than the first. Tbh I liked the first better.
Pleb trash.
Pros
>some "interesting" camerawork and long takes (even if 80% of them had hidden cuts )
>Main guy I forget his name makes the movie, bar none
>spooky elements, opening is great, rest is ok
Cons
>Pacing. Roughly 15 minutes here and there is a literally love story with the appropriate background music and lame camerawork. Kills the scary moments for sure
>villain is weak, is killed in 15 seconds after discovering how to be defeated
>jump scares are the only real horror. The spooky people are kids, yellow eyes, or face paint
>the terrible cgi monster looks like sown thing from a Tim burton film
>once again pacing.
4.6/10
>>70737756
recent horror film recommendations, anyone?
>>70738081
Explain why?
Saw it and I was disappointed.
I like how in the first movie every character played their role in the movie well: the dad was a good dad and the assistant was a good assistant.
But in this movie Americans in London are like fish out of water and their British counterparts are weird.
The possessed girl was cute. I hope they show more of her skin. But now she is well covered
>>70738280
>the terrible cgi monster looks like sown thing from a Tim burton film
This was a huge problem for me. Completely out of place, reminded me of shitty PG-13 "horror" movies.
Also, the demon's literally just the witch from the first movie in a nun costume.
>>70738280
>looks like sown thing from a Tim burton film
Straight out of James Wan's Insidious
Usual horror: people hold secret hates worse than the ghost
James Wan horror: men love women. Brothers stand up for sisters. Even neighbors take care of neighbors.
>>70738437
It's a brand of homogenized studio horror. The Conjuring, Insidious, Sinister–––what's the difference?
>>70737756
in terms of story and plot, it's really nothing new. but damnit, Wan got pretty creative with the camera work in this one. definitely one of the better horror movies in the past few years.
he understands how typical horror movies set up scenes for jump scares, so he'll set one up and as you're going "aaaaand jump scare" it just cuts to the next scene.
a little too much CG near the end tho. overall, i liked it better than the first. too many people overhyped the first one for me, so i was left disappointed. this one: i got exactly what i was expecting.
>>70738519
i agree it was a bit out of place, but it turns out that it wasn't CGI which is surprising.
I enjoyed it. I felt bad for the kids and got a Dickens vibe from the family.
If saying the demon's name is the only way to defeat it, why the fuck did the demon tell Lorraine its name?
>>70739029
It was taunting her in the dream world. If you look in the background right before the painting scene, her daughter's crafts spelled out the demons name.
>>70738743
Nothing wrong with this in my eyes, cineplex style horror can be shitty too like most of the PA sequels.
I really do appreciate Wan's skill. I Liked the variety of the jump scares and scary scenarios, some killer scenes like 'MY HOUSE!' and the Painting one
>>70739153
Also you see the name when her and Patrick Wilson are talking at the dining room table (where she's asking him to stop taking cases)
why didn't the demon throw Mr Warren out of the window personally?
Why must he wait for him to fell by himself?
>>70738343
House of the Devil
"This is soooo scary it's based on a real events" bullshit
>>70739477
"I'm a contrarian posting on 4chan" bullshit
>>70739461
House of the devil is dope but its like the antithesis of Wan horror, don't even try showing it too friens because I know they'll get bored and ask when something is going to happen
I fucking hated my experience.
theater full of chads and bitches talking thru the entire fucking movie with their giggles and "aaaw shit" comments.
If I was the neighbor I would have kicked them out.
I don't know how the neighbor guy put up with these shits
Just saw it tonight, and honestly I'm a little disappointed.
I loved the first one so much that maybe my hopes where just to high for it, but I dont regret going to see it.
The camera work was good and the jump scares where fun but there was some things that just kept getting in the way for me.
The set up for the movie was just making things to predictable. To much lovey dovey scenes that really kill the horror boner and just feel out of place.
Good flick, worth seeing, but just didnt surpass the first one in really any way for me.
Was it better than the first?
>>70740491
I just hate it when it's moved to England. It's forced
>that foreshadowing with the golden letters on the bookshelf when Lorraine was reading the bible in her study
nice
-CGI for crooked man sucked a fat dick
-Too much reliance on jump scares
The little bits of humour every now and again helped to make me feel a little more comfortable, so when it came back to building up to something spooky it was a lot stronger.
Nun Demon was scary, Old man was kinda ehh, Crooked man did his job of being scary for the kids in the movie.
Weakest entry of the three.
>>70741080
It wasn't CGI you mong.
>>70741080
Annabelle was waaaaaaaay worse than this.
>Too much reliance on jump scares
Two Best scenes (Interview with backs turned and shifty painting) didn't rely on jumpscares
>>70740534
Opinions vary wildly.
Some say it's better than the first, others say it falls short. But I've yet to see anyone say it was about equal.
>>70741223
What was it?
>>70741271
What about every single other scare though? Not just that single one.
>>70737756
>Seems like one of the better american horror films ever produced tbqh.
It doesn't, but it was enjoyable.
>>70741288
Combination of puppetry, costumes and editing. There was a whole thing about it, I'll try to find it.
Scariest moment was the nun and the painting.
>>70741327
Jump scare are important to a Wan horror and people like them, thought he ratcheted up the tension really well in some of them (TV scene) and he didn't use the fake scare meme too often.
I agree its a little bit full on in the sense that spooky shit happens in pretty much every scene but this was never going to be a Ti West style slow burn. what it does right, it does really right.
>>70738343
The Descent
>>70738343
People hate Women in Black but I think its really well done
Are jumpscares really necessary for a horror? I'd love to see a movie that is just TENSION with not a single jumpscare to be found, just to see if your imagination works better.
>>70741515
People don't like it?
First I've heard of this.
>>70741634
Yes. Because it's fun and tension is boring.
![large_zVjvNrKs5EYXrvHPpuRovjnLIml[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ThghGfi.jpg "large_zVjvNrKs5EYXrvHPpuRovjnLIml[1].jpg")
>>70741634
>I'd love to see a movie that is just TENSION with not a single jumpscare to be found
pic-related
>>70741834
Sweet, I'll check it out then.
What about a mindfuck horror movie? Like the characters are in the haunted place but the noises and things they see out the corner of their eye is the "camera". The people watching these characters were the audience themselves, like a fourth wall breaking thing?
>>70738544
That still doesn't mean it's well designed or even fits
>The church doesn't want to get involved from a family begging for help for fear of being trolled so well just fly out people from the U.S. And give them housing for 3 days instead of just sending anyone from the country
to the people who liked this movie: did you like the first one?
I thought the first one was INSANELY "whatever." I've actually never been so meh'd by a movie before. Maybe because the ratings are so high, but most likely because it was absolutely nothing new and not scary at all.
I had never seen this type of horror movie before, and once it ended I was like "Yeah this was EXACTLY what I expected it to be. Nothing unusual, nothing unique, no twists. Just a perfect depiction of 'every classic haunted area movie i've ever heard of."
Honestly I cannot see the appeal of it at all. It was so vapid that I actually didn't even feel anything once it ended.
>>70737902
Literally the saviour of modern horrorEven though he keeps making the same movie
>>70737756
haven't seen this yet but I'm keeping it on the back burners. I like Ron Livingston, so does the second installment hold up without his involvement?
last horror movie i watched was the witch a few days ago and really enjoyed it, despite having trouble following some of the dialouge.
my main thing to look for in horror movies (and in general) is the intricacy of the the camera work and its sound editing. not too fussed about the monsters themselves honestly, just as long as the film is made well
>>70742326
I liked it much more than the first one. The first one was alright, but I didn't find anything that scary in it and the characters were pretty shit.
>>70739537
Well I'm sorry to hear that
Just came back from it.
Camera was fairly nice but other than that it was super disappointing.
>>70738743
Sinister was shockingly not bad
The rest is cliche trash tho
>>70742910
>is the intricacy of the the camera work and its sound editing.
This is one thing this movie does, some of the camera is brilliantly creative and the music and sound editing is the usual wan tier quality (maybe nothing as good the hide and clap scene or the creepy old timey song in Insidious but still pretty good)
I don't care if you hated the movie or now but that blurry show was fucking good.
>>70742162
That's how all exorcism movies ever worked
Why was Ed Warren so based?
>>70743055
I don't get what people say about the creative angles. Does any scene pop up to you to explain this? I'm not too knowledgeable on the genre and the cliches aside from GUY CLOSES BATHROOM CABINET, SPOOPY GHOST BEHIND HIM
>>70742162
>housing for 3 days
They stayed in the family's house though
>>70742326
>That pic
Okay, what am I looking at?
>>70743156
>the twisting of the cameras at the beginning
>long scene that had clever use of blur/focus
>long shots with no cuts
>that subtle lighting on the nuns painting's eyes
>>70743283
I see, any timecodes? I need to watch it again to really pick out these things. I'd love to learn more about what makes a good horror GOOD.
>>70741834
>>70741958This movie is really boring
>>70743330
If you've seen the exorcist (and sequels) this website does some nice analysis of camera trickery and symbolism with timestamps
http://captainhowdy.com/
>>70743429
Can't find it. Would like to have timecodes for the Conjuring 2 though so I can see what Anon means. Studying both classic and new horror and seeing what's timeless and works versus what falls flat and people get eventually bored of would go far. I just find that sortof thing incredibly interesting.
Just got back from watching it. It was pretty good and I really don't care for horror anymore.
Only scenes I didn't care for were the crooked man but everything else was great
>>70737998
I get what you're saying, but honestly all of the "greatest horror films" are loaded with jump scares. If a jump scare accompanies a scene which is frightful to begin with, I think it's acceptable. I'm only really annoyed if it feels cheap, like if somebody's friend puts a hand on their shoulder, or there's an abrupt cut to a cat's scream.
Wan seems to put a lot of effort into atmosphere, so I think if he ever teamed up with a truly great writer, we'd get a killer movie.
Do the Warrens just love leaving their own child alone in a house full of haunted shit?
>>70743283
The only long shot with no cuts was the backs to the demon scene
Every other one had hidden cuts
I will say it did have some creative camerawork, too bad the script was a piece of shit
>all you calling this movie good
I also love movies with the tone all over the place. Horror/romantic comedies movies are the best
>>70744477
>minor shifts in tone
>TONE IS ALL OVER THE PLACE
Come on
>>70744197
Because they knew those objects are perfectly ordinary
>>70740716
i noticed those letters when they first appeared and was like what the fuck is valek, must be the people that made the cgi or something, then forgot about it till she was like i know the name. and i was like oh shit nice.
>>70738343
Borderlands
I couldn't make myself interested in that cliched spooky house shit even if my life depended on it
Let me guess. Theres le spooky vintage song playing somewhere in the movie. Nobody ever switches lights on. Le spooky shadows and le spooky kids bedroom scenes. What a fucking piece of shit film genre.
>>70738445
Kys pedo
>>70744769
that's cause most people don't know what the fuck makes something scary.
Biggest fuckup is that music tends to be jarring and everybody wants to show off their pet monster or ghost they wrote. Make a horror without a soundtrack, just eerie silence/footsteps/dialogue and never show the entity and you're going to have a better, less cliche movie by default.
>>70744769
>Theres le spooky vintage song playing somewhere in the movie.
Wan got me on this.
When they place the record I thought it was going to be one of those moments.
But then nope. He fooled me on that.
