Monday, October 24, 2016

A Quiet Passion: Some Might Even Say...Too Quiet...

Emily Dickinson spent most of her life in her family home, going about her business and writing. So Terence Davies' A Quiet Passion, which I caught at the Philadelphia Film Festival this past weekend, is hardly surprising in its muted tone. However, for the things that the film chooses to highlight, its "quiet passion" might be a little too reflexive to hold an audience's interest.

The story begins as Emily Dickinson is leaving seminary school to return home to her family, where she would go on to spend the rest of her life. As playful as she is with her words, Emily seems to hide a spiritedness that she's over-aware of and that she's uncomfortable showing to others. While she publishes poems here and there, as she ages she becomes more and more reclusive and bitter, a mental state that seems to be mimicked in her poetry.

Image result for ca quiet passion

I always have a problem with biopics. Especially ones like this one, which reminds me so much of last year's Mr. Turner. It spends so much time in simply following the character (or maybe its interpretation of the character) that there ends up being no room for history or context -- or even entertainment. A Quiet Passion leaves a lot to be desired. From the choice in casting Cynthia Nixon as Emily Dickinson to the (in my opinion) overly-wrought dialogue, there really isn't a ton here to hold your attention unless you're really into long shots of completely silent rooms. We get it. She was quiet. She was passionate. Can we speed this up please.

I wish that they could've infused a little more action into the film. While Emily is a solitary creature, the only chatty relief during the film comes from her sister, Vinny (Jennifer Ehle), who treats Emily with an unending amount of kindness and restraint, and their neighbor Ms. Buffam (Catherine Bailey), who reads as the period's Samantha Jones. But even this dialogue is so laborious that it doesn't seem authentic. Where I imagine the director/writer Terence Davies thought that Emily would enjoy "sparring" with close friends and neighbors, the language is as clipped and as hard to follow as an episode of Gilmore Girls. And with dialogue that doesn't ring super authentic, it's hard to get a taste for who these characters are. As with any historical period drama, directors are left to fill in the gaps. But I'm willing to bet that one of America's most celebrated poets had to have been more interesting than this. I'm sure there must be a better balance between historical accuracy and entertainment. 

Image result for ca quiet passion
"Hang on, let's get a 15-min shot of her reading this piece of paper.
And no voice-over of what it says."

I also wasn't thrilled with the handling of Emily's death, or that of her parents. While there's something to be said for authenticity, there wasn't a ton to take away from watching Emily physically die. Bright's Disease sounds horrible, but I was more annoyed that no one seemed to acknowledge her extreme back pains and seizures throughout her life, than to marvel at everyone's devotion to her as she breathed her last breath.

All in all, I found this movie annoying (if you couldn't tell). What a fascinating life to cover, and yet her poems are read in Nixon's irritating voice with a lack of [quiet] passion. I would have liked to see someone else cast as the lead, and with more of a story to tell than just following the poet around. It's wonderful to offer a peek at the life of a person that you know, but for anyone who isn't familiar with the life of Emily Dickinson this will just read as a slow film.

4 outa 10. 

(Disclaimer: This trailer is misleadingly interesting. There was almost no music in this film.)

Monday, October 10, 2016

22 Best Spooky Flicks for Scaredy Cats

Now, dear readers, I'm sure I don't have to tell you that I like scary movies. If you don't believe me, check out the enormous lists that I made of every classic horror movie since 1942. Well, one list, divided into Part 1 and Part 2. (Oh shush, like you didn't think I'd put thought into this.)

ANYWAY! Since it has become increasingly clear to me in the past few years that a lot of people don't like scary movies, I've put together the wuss's dream list of Halloween flicks. Movies that will have you tense without involuntarily diving into your hooded sweatshirt; that smell more like pumpkin spice than rotting corpses. 

So, in order of creep-factor, here we go! 


1. Ichabod and Mr. Toad (click the titles for the trailers!)
The more festive half of this movie is the tale of Ichabod Crane, but if you're renting/buying/watching this legally this you'll probably have to sit through Mr. Toad's Wind in the Willows tale first. Just a heads-up. Anyway, this is the classic New England story of a superstitious school-teacher who hears a story about a Headless Horseman and then disappears. Did he run away? Was he taken? Who knows. But this half-hour cartoon is full of fun songs and Bing Crosby's lovely crooning so who cares? 


Linus is convinced that the Great Pumpkin is bound to appear, doling out gifts to neighborhood kids, as he sits in a pumpkin patch waiting. Another 1960s classic that Schultz wrote himself. If you want some smooth jazz with your cartoons, Great Pumpkin delivers the same kind of music that comes with its Christmas counterpart. 


Really just adorable. Overprotective, single father Dracula has made it his life's purpose to host all manner of ghosts and ghouls at his monster-centric hotel. But when his teenage daughter starts to fall for a human, he has to do his best to protect her while keeping up appearances. Really funny, and Sandler's Dracula is better than you'd expect. The sequel's on Netflix!


Louise Miller is a total nerd. But when she finds out that she's a witch on the cusp of realizing her true power, she decides to go for the hottest guy in school and become the most popular girl. Come for the hokey plot, stay for the insane late-80's outfits.


Anyone in their mid-20s probably saw this movie on the Disney Channel when it first came out. Marnie and her two siblings learn that their family hails from an alternate world called Halloweentown, and their grandmother (played by the still-incredibly-spry Debbie Reynolds) takes them there. But all is not well in Halloweentown, and the kids have to take it upon themselves to save the town and their mom before the night is over.


Such an underrated vampire flick for little kiddies! After Tony Thompson moves to Scotland, he makes friends with a young vampire named Rudolph. Together with Rudolph's family, Tony helps them search for an amulet that could turn them human -- while also trying to dodge resident vampire-hunter, Rookery. Great performances from the cute little actors and the setting keeps this one spooky without getting too scary!


Before Sarah Michelle Gellar there was Kristy Swanson. And before Buffy was a bad-ass, she was a damn good cheerleader. When Buffy is visited by a strange man (who, for whatever reason, is played by Donald Sutherland), she learns that it's up to her to keep her family's legacy and hunt vampires. A few creepy moments, but it's mostly just delightfully cheesy. Look for a hilarious performance by Paul Reubens (who you might know better as Pee-Wee Herman).


Aw, remember when Bill Pullman was in everything? Ahhh, the 90's. While the special effects might not have held up, this is still a Halloween classic. And who didn't think that Human Casper was super cute when they were like 12?


Okay, not super Halloweeny, but it takes place in fall and it's about ghosts, right? It can stay. Who doesn't know the story of the four guys who saved NYC from a spectral apocalypse? Who you gonna call!?


10. Hocus Pocus
I doubt that Disney had any idea how big a hit this would be among millennials. Two kids move from L.A. to Salem, Massachusetts and accidentally free three notorious witches, who come back to suck the lives out of children to sustain their own youth. (Jeez, when you summarize it like that, it sounds like it should be a lot scarier than it actually is...) I still can't think of another movie where I find any of these three leading actresses more hilarious and I dare you to not get "I Put a Spell on You" stuck in your head.


11. The Witches
An underrated movie adapted from Roald Dahl's chapter book of the same name, this one is a little creepier than most of the other kids' movies. A child and his grandmother go to the English coast for a vacation, only to find that the hotel is full of witches. After the little boy stumbles upon their plot to get rid of all the world's children, it's up to him, his grandma, and his friend Bruno to save the day. Creature effects from the Jim Henson lab could cheese it up for adults, but, if I remember correctly from my childhood, could also be a little scary for little ones! 


12. Nightmare Before Christmas
Ah, every emo kid's favorite movie. Jack, the Pump-kin King (c'mon, you sang it too), is a little jaded with living his life for each Halloween. After he stumbles upon the holiday of Christmas, he makes it his mission to switch things up a bit -- to the horror of Santa Claus and the world's children. An amazing soundtrack and perfect clay-mation make this one worth seeing.


13. Corpse Bride
Another Tim Burton clay-mation classic. When Victor and Victoria (hm. never noticed that before.) are arranged by their parents to be married, they are relieved to find that they are both willing to make it work. But when Victor accidentally weds a corpse bride, he then needs to find out how to leave his undead wife for his original intended. Some sweet tunes and sentiments despite the morbid setting.


14. Paranorman
In my opinion, Chris Butler takes Burton's clay-mation to the next level. Butler's incredibly detailed film follows Norman, a nerdy outsider who can see ghosts, and who lives in a town notorious for its hanging of a witch in the 1700s. Visited by his dead uncle, he's given the task of keeping the witch's spirit at bay on Halloween night but botches it. As the witch's spirit is unleashed on the town, we learn that things are not always what they appear.


One of my faves! And, coincidentally, another clay-mation movie. Coraline Jones has just moved into a new house and is not happy about her parents' lack of sympathy. After finding a secret door in her living room, however, she discovers a world of wonders, and parents who seem to understand her. But everything isn't as it appears, and it's up to Coraline to figure out the true intentions of her Other Mother before it's too late.


16. What We Do in the Shadows
This mockumentary of the lives of three vampire roommates is just what you need to keep festive without getting scared. Camera crews follow these three undead guys as they deal with trying to get into clubs by asking to be invited in, the travesty of not being able to see your own reflection, and the insanely annoying habits of their newly "turned" friend Nick. And the dialogue is amazing. "What are we?" "Werewolves, not swearwolves."


17. Shaun of the Dead
Classic zombie comedy Shaun of the Dead really set the bar for off-beat creature features. Shaun must lead his group of friends to safety after their English village becomes infested by zombies. You'll never hear Queen's "Don't Stop Me Now" the same way again.


18. The Rocky Horror Picture Show
A couple gets lost on the road and takes shelter in quite the off-beat mansion. As a crazy transvestite doctor, his human creation, and his off-beat posse teach Janet and Brad their ways, things start to get pretty weird. Let's do the time-warp again!


19. Practical Magic
Two sisters happen to come from a long line of witches. After one of them gets in trouble with an abusive boyfriend, it's up to them how to figure out how to clean up their own mess and use powers they didn't know they had. A nostalgia trip from the late 90s -- velvet tank tops and maxi skirts never looked so good!


20. Children of the Corn
When a couple gets lost on the road, they stumble on a town that is complete devoid of adults. As they try to find their way out, they uncover that it's run by a cult of children, and that they aren't so happy to find adults in their midst. Nowhere near as scary as the original story from Stephen King, and cheesy enough that it's pretty free of serious scares.


21. Carrie
"They're all gonna laugh at you!" I mean, her insane mom warned her. Who hasn't felt like an outsider? But when Carrie White fully hones her psychic powers, her fellow classmates get to learn the hard way that they should've been a little nicer to her.


Spielberg at his finest. This is probably my favorite of all of his films, honestly. A family starts getting tormented by a power that lives inside their home. After it takes the youngest child into its own dimension, it's up to the rest of them to get her back. The best part of this movie is how strong the family is and how much they love each other. Great acting. Those who are afraid of clowns be warned -- I'm sure you've heard of this scene already.

Also worth mentioning if you're a bit of a wimp:

Anything old! There were seriously too many to list that are worth a watch but that happened more than 60 years ago. So, if you're into old movies take a gander at the dated beauties in Part 1 of my original list, or check out classics like Vertigo; Psycho; The Birds; The Night of the HunterLeave Her to Heaven; The UninvitedBell Book and Candle; Arsenic and Old Lace; etc. Dig around! There's a lot of good ones out there!

Sunday, October 9, 2016

The Girl on the Train: When Bad Movies Happen to Good Books

I keep going back and forth in my mind as to whether David Fincher's Gone Girl was a detriment for this movie. Even reading the book The Girl on the Train, there are a lot of similarities with Gone Girl in trying to find a girl who's gone missing, and having a host of untrustworthy narrators. It also doesn't help that Gone Girl is one of the best film adaptations to have happened in the past decade. By comparison, The Girl on the Train feebly delivers a watered-down narrative that could've packed a lot more punch.

The plot mostly centers on Rachel, a woman who turns to alcohol to deal with the split from her husband, who left her to start a family with another woman. To cope with her days, she rides the trains from the suburbs of New York into Manhattan, passing her old home and taking a particular interest in one of the neighboring houses, where a young couple seem to have the picture-perfect life. After seeing something from the train and going to confront the couple in person, Rachel experiences a black-out and, upon waking, learns that the young woman has gone missing. What follows is a tangled narrative as everyone tries to find her, and Rachel struggles to remember what happened that fateful night.

Hmmm, did I murder her...?

First of all, let's all acknowledge the fact that it's hard to squeeze an entire novel into a two-hour film. Books are fluid in that you become intimate with lead characters: you hear their thoughts, see what they see, feel what they feel, and are easily taken into their entire world. Translating that into something that is objectively visual and audial is tricky, and that's where this movie runs into trouble.

The book gives us an intense look at the private thoughts of three very different women: Rachel, our main character; Megan, the girl who has gone missing; and Anna, the woman that Rachel's ex-husband has started a family with. For reasons that I don't really understand, director Tate Taylor decided to eliminate almost ALL of the internal dialogue from the source material. Which is unfortunate, because honestly that's what the bulk of the narrative hinges on: the fact that people keep secrets from each other, and that you never know who anyone truly is.

"Are you a murderer?"
"Idk, are YOU a murderer?"
"Idk."

Since the internal dialogue is missing, the movie then cobbles together a narrative based on the characters' interactions, which leaves the story feeling half-assed and melodramatic. It doesn't help, either, that almost everyone (except Emily Blunt, that beautiful professional) is also a little too pretty in this movie. For themes that rely on the lives of normal people, we are presented with would-be Victoria's Secret model Haley Bennet as she gives a one-dimensional performance as the mysterious, artistic Megan, and beefcake Luke Evans who does his best as her angry, domineering husband, Scott. It reads amateur, almost like a Lifetime movie, where all of the characters are underdeveloped, overly made-up, and someone is always sleeping with someone else's -- wait a second, that's like half the plot of this movie...

It's actually kind of hilarious how well this photo could fit into
the plot of The Girl on the Train. Let that sink in.

I will, however, give a special shout-out to Emily Blunt. Blunt carries the bulk of this movie with a cringe-worthy performance as the constantly drunk Rachel. While it takes a while to understand her perspective, she ends up being a pretty sympathetic lead. Also, shout-out to her cosmetic team: her smeared makeup and puffy face made it hard to believe that she didn't spend at least half of her time on set being actually drunk. So...that's impressive.

5 outa 10. If this was a Lifetime that accidentally made it into theaters, I wouldn't have been surprised. As it is, I'm a little surprised that they gave such a popular adaptation to someone as green as Tate Taylor. Come on, buddy. You can do better.


Friday, August 12, 2016

Lights Out: Horror Flick Puts Fear of the Dark in a New Light

I don't think there's a fear that's more universal than being scared of the dark. If you have a wild imagination, there's no end to the possibility of the variety of things that might be lurking in it. And while this has been a staple in scary movies for a while, Lights Out lets this theme take the lead in a creative plot that'll have you sleeping with the lights on, just in case.

Hey, you never know.

The story revolves around a mother (Maria Bello), her son Martin (Gabriel Bateman), and his half sister, Rebecca (Teresa Palmer). After the mysterious death of her husband, the mom is kind of losing it, and with a history of mental illness things aren't looking so healthy for Martin's wellbeing. But as the story progresses we soon learn that maybe it's not mental illness alone that's driving her so crazy. A thing known as Diana seems to be affecting her. Only existing in darkness, Diana tries her damnedest to monopolize the mom's time and energy, lashing out violently when she's told to share her. As Rebecca and Martin uncover more about Diana's past and try to help their mom, it's a race against time to see whether their mission will cost them their lives.

"The mom's all yours! Anyway bye!"

Other than the fantastically scary trailer (scroll to the bottom if you haven't seen it), I was drawn in by James Wan's producer credit on this movie. If you've read any of my horror reviews before, James Wan is basically my favorite scary guy of all time and his name on anything is almost a stamp of certainty that I'll see it.

I was not let down.

The movie is original, simple, and damn scary. Director David Sandberg takes something so universal and turns it into a real scare-fest. Diana is scary, and while she's lurking in the shadows, the evidence that we see of her will scare the pants off you. Lots of jumps in this, and lots of old-school horror.

The movie is very self-aware of bringing classic horror to a new front, but does so with themes rather than messing with classic horror plot formulae. Rebecca is a strong independent female character, the story highlights mental illness, and the kid is smart as a whip. We're not feeding into character stereotypes, and that's super refreshing. Teresa Palmer is (fucking gorgeous and) powerful as Rebecca, who can't get over the early loss of her dad but steps up to plate when it comes down to protecting her family, and Maria Bello is convincing as the exhausted mother.

Like why are her eyes so giant and beautiful?? Anyway, I digress...

I can't really expand on the movie too much without giving a bunch away, but suffice it to say that this one puts a new spin on classic horror, and it's definitely a fun watch. Looking forward to where this franchise goes.

8 outa 10. Winner, winner.

(Like, seriously, how scary is this trailer though!?)


Tuesday, August 9, 2016

Ghostbusters: All-Female Cast Makes Best of No-Win Situation

Honestly, when I first heard that they were remaking the Ghostbusters, my first thought was "Oh no." Another classic that was plunging headlong into unwinnable territory. And though I was intrigued by the direction that they were taking with it (better to go away from your source material than to try and copy it, especially in comedy), I'm sorry to say that my first impression was mostly right.

The plot follows three women who have always had a vested interest in the science behind the paranormal, and who are later joined by another woman who has an extensive knowledge of the city where they live: New York City, of course. As they track isolated incidents of ghosts being a little...overactive, they uncover a madman's plot to try and bring destruction to New York. It's then up to the four new Ghostbusters to try and stop him before his plan is complete.

These ladies gon' kick your ass, evildoer.

The cool thing about this movie is how hard they try to keep it contemporary while still paying tribute to the original. The ghostbusters are now four women, they're all scientists, the comedy is once again improv-based, and the story is set in New York with innumerable homages to the original film. Each comedienne plays her strengths and there's a lot of throw-away lines that keep the movie entertaining in a way that makes a little more sense for 2016.

That being said, the movie is kind of weird in deciding to be a remake and not a continuance of the original. For all the shoutouts that they give the original, it would've probably made more sense for the girls to grow up idolizing the original Ghostbusters and not just inventing a ghost-hunting business from scratch. With an audience that has grown up watching the cartoon series and sipping on Hi-C Ecto-Cooler, the idea of Ghostbusters is far from revolutionary. I would've loved to have seen a plot that acknowledged the past of the Ghostbusters while maybe growing a little more cynical -- I think that would match the 2016 mood perfectly. Also, with a continuance, they could've gone the route of having the inclusion of the old guys without having to give them obscure roles that stand out like sore thumbs. Bill Murray's role is woefully incomplete, and the others settle themselves with roles where they spit out 5 lines before disappearing from the screen altogether.

Anyway see ya later.

I also felt that while each of the four actresses are all hilarious in her own right, their individual versions of comedy have a hard time marrying well in this. In what feels like it should be another Bridesmaids, Wiig's drippy character remains drippy without really going through any kind of metamorphosis, and McCarthy's character isn't allowed the characterization of being weird, nor the whacky scenarios that are so perfect for her brand of improv. It must be said that Kate McKinnon steals that thunder for herself as the Class A Weirdo of the bunch, and Leslie Jones tries her best to balance them all out. All said, it reads a little weird. Maybe it's too many comedians? While the original had four, it was also a different, understated brand of comedy that they just can't copy for modern audiences. It's just too different.

All said, is the new Ghostbusters bad? No. Is it good? No.

Nope. Not even this beautiful specimen could make it better.

To be fair, I think that any remake of the movie would have been given a no-win scenario in which old comedy is trying to be made new. Comedy has evolved so much over the past few decades that any remakes are rendered practically impossible. Look at Dumb and Dumber, or Zoolander 2. Half the time what was funny is now not, and while Ghostbusters tries to sidestep that problem, they end up in the same cheap boat as every other forgettable remake/sequel made after a 20-30 year gap.

6.5 outa 10. A lot of funny moments, but a lack of cohesion and an over-awareness of the original material makes this a disappointingly average comedy. Sorry, ladies.

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Finding Dory: Pixar Rips Out Our Heartstrings Once Again

Contrary to what you might think after looking at my last few reviews, I am not generally a fan of sequels. Broadly speaking, since characters have already been introduced and established in the first film, unplanned sequels can take on a watered-down sort of flavor and plots can seem a little...thrown-together. And while Finding Dory ends up being a pretty good movie, the film doesn't shake this thrown-together feel until you're about halfway through.

The plot follows Dory a year after she and Marlin have (spoiler alert) found Nemo. After her memory gets jogged by something random, she remembers her parents and goes on a quest to Morro Bay, California to find them. On the way, she gets separated from Marlin and Nemo, and has to make her own way while Marlin and Nemo try to (wait for it) find Dory. On the way, she meets a bunch of new characters, remembering things that she hasn't been able to recall in years.

Oh boy!

First of all, I'd like to commend Pixar on once again ripping my goddamn heart out. Between Baby Dory's sweet little baby angel voice (WHICH KILLED ME), the fact that she's lost her parents at the age of like 3 years old, and the fact that they keep having to run around in circles all around this damn place trying to find everyone -- I may be overly sensitive but this movie killed me. It's not like Pixar is ever coy with breaking your heart, but good lord. They just spent an entire movie trying to find Marlin's son, and now they've gotta break our hearts all over again as they try and figure out how Marlin and Nemo can find Dory. It's too much, Pixar. Can we have some sunshine and rainbows next time please? Kthanks.

Alright, back into adult critic mode.

Good things: this is not Pixar's first rodeo. While I may just be overly emotional, the fact that I cried at a forgetful baby fish with giant eyes only proves that Pixar is a veritable wizard at playing people's emotions. This is a very heartfelt tale of someone trying to reconnect to their roots and to find a portion of their past. It's extremely poignant, especially the ending, without being sappy, and funny without being cheap. And of course it's a masterpiece of computer animation as all Pixar films are (how they get the ocean to look 100% real is beyond me). All told, it's a well-made film, if not the masterpiece that is Finding Nemo.

It's not you, it's your predecessor.

Now the things that bugged me: in terms of flow, the movie reads a little wonky. The first half is so jumpstarted that it's a little bewildering. Not even ten minutes after getting a first glimpse of her original life with her parents, we're thrust back into the "present" for about five minutes only to then be thrust right back into the past as Dory begins to remember things.A few jump-cuts later and we're already in Morro Bay. After about 45 minutes in, the movie finally finds its pace and the audience can settle in, but the first third of the movie is so bewilderingly jumpy in contrast to the meandering adventure of the first...it's just a little jarring.

Also, this movie has a totally different vibe than Nemo. Since this movie is told largely through Dory's eyes, there's also an underlying anxiety in this sequel that isn't present in the first. In the first one at least she has a chaperone to help her out. And while a lot of this movie is about her being able to navigate her own way as an adult with a disability, it creates so much tension that the movie ends up being a lot more on-edge than its predecessor. Far from being a determined rescue adventure with a set destination, most of the movie is spent with each character running around in circles as they keep on missing each other by inches. And with Dory's shaky memory plopped on top of that exasperating run-around, it's a wonder that anyone finds anyone.

7 outa 10.

LISTEN TO SWEET BABY DORY FISH'S VOICE IN THIS TRAILER.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

The Conjuring 2: Not for the Faint of Heart

Went ghost for a little while but now I'm back. What am I reviewing, you may be asking yourself (if you're bad at noticing titles)? Will it be the latest Avengers movie? Will it be a low-key indie film? Will it be Warcraft?!

Nay.

We're going to be discussing The Conjuring's amazing second installment, otherwise known as (wait for it)....The Conjuring 2.

Honestly, how they come up with these names for sequels
 I will never have any idea.

Let's get down to the plot: Ed and Lorraine Warren (graciously played by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga) are back slaying evil in this amazing sequel to The Conjuring. After gaining some insight into Lorraine's personal demons (like, literally) at the beginning of the movie, we're whisked away to London, where a family is experiencing some disturbances in their home. Young Janet, eleven years old, thinks she's being tormented by an evil spirit with a sinister agenda. It throws her from her bed, trashes her family's house, and frequently uses her as a host through which to speak. After the church gets wind of the disturbances, they send Ed and Lorraine out to London to assess the situation and see if the claims have any depth. It's then up to them to tell whether the whole thing is a hoax or whether they're putting themselves in extreme danger.

The fantastic thing about this sequel is (despite it's horrendous title) its originality and how it plays with your head -- and this is why James Wan is a goddamn horror master. You enter the theater expecting a straightforward scary story: there's a definite evil presence, you have a sympathetic view of the main character, and then the presence either wins or is vanquished. But the movie takes it a little further than that. This movie is a bit long, setting itself up (most horror movies run about an hour and a half -- this one is two and a quarter), but it weaves an intricate question throughout itself: "Is this girl actually possessed?" The audience's trust of the Warrens and their doubt in the girl's situation make you legitimately wonder despite the overwhelming evidence. But it's the ending that really pays off here, explaining everything. This movie's also a great example of how directors can get creative with the paranormal and make up their own rules.

Moving onto the most important part of any horror movie: was it actually scary?

Honestly, this movie was way scarier than I had anticipated. And thank god I saw this in a theater of like-minded scaredy cats and we all screamed in unison.

How do you outdo an evil, 16th-century witch? 
Oh, just make a demonic nun, totally cool.

So often horror sequels (and even originals) rely on a series of repetitive pop-ups to frighten you, and the effect turns cheesy -- especially with a subpar cast. But in The Conjuring 2, the characters aren't stupid, and the forms that the spirit takes are really frighteningly and surprisingly diverse. This is another way that Wan really stirs up some amazing horror: The "monster" is never redundant. Fear is based on the unknown, and he does a brilliant job of letting evil be unpredictable. Is it in the house? Is it outside? Is it possessing the girl again? Is it walking around on its own? Is it an old man? A nun? The crooked man?

(Spoiler alert: I screamed embarrassingly loud whenever the crooked man showed up. 
Prepare yourself.)

Really, I can't divulge too much without giving everything away, but suffice it to say that this is one sequel that is done incredibly well. The suspense sustains itself, the questions keep on popping up, and the acting is great. Wan knows what scares people, and he creates movies that get under your skin, creating an atmosphere where everything is unpredictably terrifying.

9 outa 10. Excellent classic horror movie.

Omg, even this trailer tho...