The Conjuring (James Wan)

[Henry Gale]

IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1457767/)

http://cdn.bloody-disgusting.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/the-conjuring-poster.jpg

[megladon8]

This is getting incredibly good ratings thus far.

Can't wait. Taking Jen out to see this and then have an expensive dinner for her birthday :)

[Henry Gale]

I thought it was okay.

It almost feels like a step backwards for Wan. Stylistic it's his best looking and most assured film, even to the point of working with actors and tidy story decisions stronger than usual, but after tackling such similar material with Insidious so recently (and all the divisive insanity it entailed), The Conjuring can't help but come off much less remarkable from its story trajectory to its scares. I feel like it's hindered most by being based on accounts of actual demonologists and the family depicted, so all the horror can't really do anything to taint, disparage, or suggest anything but very face-value, pure emotions regarding them or make up anything significantly terrifying or wild beyond what their claims entail.

Having said that, it is very intense in significant stretches, even if a lot of its methods for building up to scares feel repetitive after a while, which might be why quicker, quieter, more surprising moments are what have stuck with me. Also, unlike so much other recent "BASED ON REAL THINGS THAT DEFINITELY HAPPENED"-horror, it doesn't get wishy-washy with what certain things could've been. If someone gets possessed, the movie doesn't view that subjectively or provide a backdoor scientific explanation. But whether or not I believe or care about how true any of it is (I don't), majority of my issues with it stem from the final act, where it gets a little too sentimental and corny for my liking, even doing as far as to deflate a lot of the edge its imagery and tone held earlier on. It should feel earned because of how much time they spent developing the family dynamics early on, but it also feels like they didn't trust the audience in understanding basic horror movie, life and death stakes. I understand that a family memeber potentially dying is sad. Melodramatic pianos and strings aren't necessary.

So basically, it's a more mainstream-feeling Insidious, particularly mirroring that film's first hour (though a less effectively original version), but where the two films diverge are where they make their third acts shifts, trying to really pull off something unexpected. I fully get how that's the point where Insidious lost a lot of people in its arguably out-of-its-element/budget courageousness, and maybe Conjuring's more grounded, polished storytelling will appeal to that same side of the audience, but I think I prefer Wan when he's off the rails with little money to worry about. Here, he's competently conducting an expensive train at all the right stops, but the track is less interesting. (Train analogies!)

**1/2

[Irish]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BNzXipsCMAAgN7j.jpg:small

Looks like somebody took a page from William Castle's playbook. Very cool.

[Henry Gale]

That's actually really cool. Too bad the movie wasn't that effective for me.

All we got at our screening was a static screen telling us to what hashtags to use to tweet about it (#ScaryAsHell!) and what the URL's for the official Facebook and Tumblr pages were. Now I really wish they'd have put the text on that standee instead.

[Henry Gale]

The reviews rolling out for it are remaining staggeringly positive, which I find kind of baffling considering how horror movies rarely get this sort of critical respect, and I found it to be especially, disappointingly run-of-the-mill.

As much as I like them, Ed Gonzalez (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/the-conjuring) and Nick Schager (http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/reviews/major-releases/e3ic0ab28dc8ce0f8c63ec26ef18ea 423f9) don't tend to be the two guys I end up agreeing with most for recent movies, but their takes on it are definitely what mirror mine the closest so far.

[wigwam]

:|

[Pop Trash]

This was pretty solid. It's derivative (Haunting! Amityville! Poltergeist! Exorcist!) as all getout but Wan certainly knows how to construct a movie. I'd say this is a bit better than Insidious both because of the higher craft and less of the silliness of that film's third act. I liked all the Altman style push zooms and the lighting and use of negative space (shades of The Innkeepers with that) to invoke fear was great. Fans of Ti West's work should definitely seek this out.

[Pop Trash]

I'm also shocked that this is rated 'R' and not 'PG-13'...I didn't notice anything that was beyond the violence/gore level of The Dark Knight, Poltergeist, Gremlins, etc.

[Pop Trash]

I'm also shocked that this is rated 'R' and not 'PG-13'...I didn't notice anything that was beyond the violence/gore level of The Dark Knight, Poltergeist, Gremlins, etc.

Here's an article about that:

http://screenrant.com/conjuring-movie-2013-rating-r-scary/

I still think the 'R' rating is absurd. Why wouldn't you want to be scared watching a ghost based horror film? This is like not letting anyone under 17 ride a rollercoaster because it's 'scary.'

[Spun Lepton]

I'm also shocked that this is rated 'R' and not 'PG-13'...I didn't notice anything that was beyond the violence/gore level of The Dark Knight, Poltergeist, Gremlins, etc.

Well ... MPAA standards HAVE changed drastically since the days of Poltergeist and Gremlins. Just sayin'.

[ciaoelor]

I'm also shocked that this is rated 'R' and not 'PG-13'...I didn't notice anything that was beyond the violence/gore level of The Dark Knight, Poltergeist, Gremlins, etc.

Teenagers under 17 will do their best to get inside, but when they see that there's nothing explicitly R-rated in it, they'll be disappointed. Theater managers will insist that their box-office employees check i.d.'s and make sure parents aren't buying tickets and going home; the greeter will also have to check for i.d.'s at the door and so will the usher standing outside of The Conjuring's two or three screening rooms. And it'll be too much energy for nothing. The same could be said of the Paranormal Activity movies but those at least had cursing.

Scary is subjective, and I'm glad I'm not under 17 anymore.

[Pop Trash]

I don't remember any swearing in this either.

[Boner M]

It didnt quite meet my extremely high expectations, mostly because of the third act but the upsidedown camera and swinging bare lightbulb were very snazzy and it ends no worse than Insidious but it suffers that film's same problem of lingering too much on what should be teased and kept offscreen for purer scares, especially here where there's so much great harkening back to 70s horror (Exorcist, Amityville, Omen). As far as the mythology behind the supernatural events, I certainly prefer Sinister (which also couldnt land its 3rd act). But overall Wan is very talented and I look forward to Fast 7 and want to go back to see Saw (maybe...)
Agree w/ all this.

I was surprised at how satisfying this was even if it kinda fell apart by the end like I was expecting (the CGI flock of birds was a big dealbreaker for me), albeit thankfully not to the extent of Insidious. The first half or so is just so sadistically tense that I was mildly queasy and actually grateful that it became sillier and less effective thereon, albeit still scary in a fun/comforting way and always elegant and atmospheric.

Other nice stuff: the scrolling opening credits, the "Time of the Season" tracking shot, the smash-cut to TV static. (so yeah, again, it's frontloaded)

[ciaoelor]

I think this was given an R-rating for terror involving children...

Insidious had haunting images, whereas this one didn't: the demon, for one; the shot of the demon inside of the boy's room and pointing at him; the scene showing various pictures of a child haunted by a female ghost; the shot of a man outside peering through the window of the baby's bedroom; the shot of a man pacing outside of a room and suddenly entering the room; the scene where the ghost hunter lady (for lack of a better) sees the demon hanging still against the ceiling, etc...

A lot of The Conjuring's effect depends on what you think is going to happen, which is fine as you're watching it for the first time but it won't make for an exciting second viewing.

[Henry Gale]

A lot of The Conjuring's effect depends on what you think is going to happen, which is fine as you're watching it for the first time but it won't make for an exciting second viewing.

This is a major reason why even seeing this weeks beforehand, before TV advertising had really gone into overdrive, I was disappointed by just how much the promotional footage spoiled the climactic scares to long sequences. The clapping bit was something that stuck with me when I saw the trailer months prior, so once it lingered on that moment, its sadly felt inert. Which is a shame because the sequence is really well constructed and also wraps up right then and there.

Obviously this isn't the filmmakers' fault, but it really left me to only be satisfied with what was under its shock value / creepiness, which sadly relies heavily a lot on the (hopefully) unexpected. Which reminds me...

Did anyone else find the clothes-line bit to be maybe the most effectively scary thing in the movie? Considering the routine of the plotting began to feel very "Cut to night-time, someone hears a noise, they investigate it, something loud happens. Repeat.", I felt the momentum of it at that point made that image really disarming as a quick-draw shock rather than so many of its other inevitable, prolonged ones.

[Mal]

Wow, why so many positive reviews critics? This story has nothing to offer that we haven't seen before and its only success seems to be that it occasionally looked and seemed like a well made movie. Blegh. By the time the finale rolled around I really wanted Lily Taylor to just kill everyone.

[TGM]

So I thought this was pretty hokey, though it was also legitimately creepy at times, so for the most part, I thought it worked well enough. Nothing to really write home about, though.

[Bosco B Thug]

Tone deaf and relentlessly inconsequential.

[plain]

found this to be gloriously unnerving and relentless. the film's go-for-broke narrative unraveling mixed with Wan's assured aesthetics make for a classical genre go-around. it's a little crammed at times, maybe too reliant on jump scares, but the cumulative product is one of vintage shock and dread.

[ciaoelor]

I watched half of this again when I took my nephew and his girlfriend to the movies. And I'm surprised to say that the scene where one of the girls sees someone standing behind the door was still pretty effective, though this time I gave the credit to the actress who sells it perfectly.

[Rowland]

though this time I gave the credit to the actress who sells it perfectly.The acting all-around is quite strong.

[Ezee E]

Certainly derivative of many different horror movies, this still works. James Wan seems to have learned from his previous movies, and really directs the hell out of this. His actors all commit to it too, and it's unnerving from beginning to end, even if it gets a little much at the end with the daughter at home subplot.

What was the last movie to use a rolling credit?

And Vera Farmiga definitely escalated a role that most actresses would not pull off right. She's so good.

[eternity]

I suppose it's better than the two movies it directly amalgamates (Paranormal Activity 3 and Insidious), but yikes...it seems like every mainstream horror movie since Paranormal Activity has been about families haunted by invisible demons that make doors open by themselves. I like the "risk" they took by allowing the movie to have a bodycount of absolute zero, but overall, this was completely devoid of anything "new."

Also, was anybody else cracking up when they went to Narnia?

[ciaoelor]

Forgot to mention this: when one of the girls looks under her bed, I could swear I saw a drawing of a pair of sinister looking eyes drawn on the bottom of the bed.

[Ezee E]

Forgot to mention this: when one of the girls looks under her bed, I could swear I saw a drawing of a pair of sinister looking eyes drawn on the bottom of the bed.

This reminds me of why some of Lynch's scenes are the scariest around. Sometimes not actually having anything but darkness is the scariest thing there is.

[Izzy Black]

I saw this. Not entirely sure why, but I did. The cinematography was really nice in some sequences. The long tracking shot that first introduces us to the house was good. It reminded me of a similar shot at the beginning of Joe Wright's Pride and Prejudice. There are some other nice cinematic touches here and there too. I like the general languid, free-form movement of the camera overall. I'm not sure so much about how it helps the film function as horror, since I don't find horror movies scary, but it certainly found its roaming curiosity interesting. It opened up a little space for some artistic play outside of the strict confines of its narrative. And in any case, it's not something you see a lot of in Hollywood cinema.

Apart from that, the film is pretty bad. I don't feel I'm in a good position to judge horror though because I just don't find them scary. It's all so ridiculous. I was holding back laughs most of the film. I just can't take these kinds of movies seriously. It's made worse when the horror mythology borders on outright sexist anti-intellectualism. Although the film somewhat attempts to subvert the role of the patriarchal power structure in Catholicism by having Farmiga's character play the crucial role in the exorcism, it lazily and casually invokes the Salem witch trails to cast the demon that haunts Lily Taylor as a hysterical, devil-worshiping witch without any level of self-awareness about the systematic misogyny underwriting that historical event. In general, the entire film does it best to flatter the Catholic institution with only occasional moments of light, critical snark and essentially nothing to question the role its mythology has played in the systematic oppression of women.

[megladon8]

You guys are nuts. This was fantastic.

Incredible craftsmanship on display here. Wan has grown immensely since the dreadful Saw.

[Ezee E]

You guys are nuts. This was fantastic.

Incredible craftsmanship on display here. Wan has grown immensely since the dreadful Saw.

Very much so. And I said that at Insidious. This is another big step up.

[megladon8]

Very much so. And I said that at Insidious. This is another big step up.


This movie had some almost Kubrick level cinematography. The shot of the Warrens' daughter coming down the hallway and stairs, with the door to the "relic room" slowly opening; the upside down/reverse shots of Mrs. Warren running out of the house and Drew running into the house.

Man, this was a gorgeous movie.

I loved how low key it all was, so the glimpses of the supernatural were utterly horrifying.

The scene that stood out for me was the little girl waking to her leg being pulled, then crying in absolute terror as she sees something standing behind the door (though we, the audience, never see a thing). When her parents eventually come and she tells them "it spoke to me - it said it wants to see my family dead."

When I turned to Jen after that scene, there were tears streaming down her face. I wouldn't be surprised if I had them, too.

[number8]

Pretty great acting in this. If nothing else, James Wan apparently knows how to work with child actors, which is a huge plus for a horror director. The actors did a lot of heavy lifting in selling the utterly banal story. Without them making that whole third act seem so stressful and relentless, I'd probably have checked out given the yet-another-exorcism climax (which I think This is the End has effectively ruined for me forever).

Pretty disappointed that the artifact room didn't turn into a Cabin in the Woods situation.

I think I prefer Insidious.

[number8]

Also, got into a discussion of this on the way home: we wondered if we're being cheated out of the full effectiveness of movies like these by not being Catholic.

[Ezee E]

Also, got into a discussion of this on the way home: we wondered if we're being cheated out of the full effectiveness of movies like these by not being Catholic.

Perhaps. Why are all of these movies with Catholicism? Why can't we have a demonic movie in any other faith?

[number8]

Perhaps. Why are all of these movies with Catholicism? Why can't we have a demonic movie in any other faith?

I kinda wanna see a movie where they call a Mormon priest.

[Winston*]

The Unborn has a Jewish demon and a Rabbi in the exorcist role (though they still bring in a priest near the end). It's also one of the worst films I've seen in my life.

[Rowland]

Perhaps. Why are all of these movies with Catholicism? Why can't we have a demonic movie in any other faith?Last year's The Possession was a Jewish exorcism movie, complete with a rabbi exorcist and a Dibbuck box.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Hey, I'm trying to shop around a ghost story with Buddhist tropes at its core, but nobody's buying.

[Ezee E]

I guess Exorcism of Emily Rose factored in an atheist covering the case. It was actually a pretty good take on the exorcism movie.

[Morris Schæffer]

Nothing less than one of the scariest movies of the past five years. Goes a tad bonkers towards the end, but goddamn that first hour!

[Dead & Messed Up]

This was fun.

It felt like this makes good on what Insidious wanted to be, given that it's dealing with almost the exact same structure and tropes, albeit with a period twist. Patrick Wilson seemed a little just-there, but Farmiga, Livingston, and especially Lili Taylor gave their characters emotional dimension that the screenplay doesn't provide on its own. Wan decreased his emphasis on jump-scares, allowed the audience a few brief sequences of Carpenter/Bava gliding camera, and simply let most of the movie be about the waiting, which is how a movie like this should work.

I agree with Izzy in that the witchy stuff rubbed me the wrong way. The more I've read about witchcraft, the more I've come to resent the way that we now use the trope purely to demonstrate malefic, anti-maternal women, without any attempt to recognize the rampant misogyny that created witch trials in the first place. This also bothered me a bit with Lords of Salem, although that film was so expressionistic that its images neatly left the bounds of reality early on. By trying to be matter-of-fact and honorable to the "true story," this flick doesn't get a free pass.

Also, once you learn that the demon forces moms to kill their children, you gotta wonder why the ghostbusters didn't immediately separate Lili Taylor's character from the rest of the family.

That said, the flick is worth seeing. There's none of the psychological interest you'll find in the films of Lewton, or in movies like The Innocents and The Haunting, but there's some good scare sequences, a nice mood, and better performances than you'd expect.

[Scar]

It has been so long since I've had a good old fashioned goose bumply flick. As has been said before, it doesn't quite stick the landing, but still a very entertaining ride.

I soooooo wish the clothesline scare wasn't spoiled in the trailers.

[Dukefrukem]

Wicked good! Well crafted TENSE scares and great exorcism scene. I don't think there's a single jump scare in the whole movie. Even the obligatory horror cliche ending scare was omitted intentionally. James Wan continues to improve his craft. He might be the best horror filmmaker right now. (Haven't seen Insidious 2 yet)

[number8]

You like James Wan? You should see his new movie.... Fast & Furious 7.

[Grouchy]

Yeah, this was fantastic. I had seen no trailers and in fact the last James Wan movie I'd seen was Saw, so, zero expectations. What I found is a classic throwback to atmospheric haunted house Horror. Wan has got a lot better as a director since Saw, and there are shots and scenes in this that are staggeringly awesome and gorgeous to look at.

The plot is nothing special, and since it's based around some of the same characters than inspired The Amytiville Horror, there are a lot of similarities with those movies. But I thought Wilson and Farmiga really sold their characters well - they were paranormal investigators I believed in. "Someone behind the door" is the best part. I agree with whoever said that the tension in that moment is so effective that I thought I was seeing things when it's clearly just a patch of black on the screen.

[Kurosawa Fan]

This had some fantastic scares, and was a really tense experience. Why oh why did it have to be so corny when dealing with the different family relationships and histories? Tainted what was otherwise a fantastic experience.

[KK2.0]

Also, got into a discussion of this on the way home: we wondered if we're being cheated out of the full effectiveness of movies like these by not being Catholic.

I'm an atheist and don't believe in the devil but fear of the devil is kind of imprinted in my psyche because I grew up in a catholic family, films like this end up bringing back these feelings every time. At least it makes these kind of horror movies more fun to watch! Had a scary good time with The Conjuring, although a bit derivative i felt it was a much more solid effort than Insidious.

Here in Brazil there's a strong following of the Spiritism doctrine, it's not uncommon to know a few mediums in person. Such a strange lifestyle.

[Irish]

Outstanding.

Might have Insidious a little bit of an edge because the image of that Darth Maul demon peeping out from behind the chair in the middle of the day stuck in my mind for weeks afterwards

The first 3/4 of this are desperately freaky. Characters are well grounded, which helped the material a lot & Wan is clever to get such good actors.

Unlike say ... Ti West & a lot of other horror directors, Wan knows how to establish space & use it to his advantage. I noticed that tracking shot of the little girl moving from room to room at the start, too, & it was wonderful.

Also. The success of this movie proves that horror doesn't need more remakes & reboots & bullshit. You can make a good film about well covered ground.

Great stuff. I hope Wan was lying when he said recently he was done with the genre.

[Ezee E]

The Darth Maul shot is why I give grounding to The Conjuring. :lol:

[dreamdead]

As others have repeatedly stated, this one starts so well. It sets up the space of the house nicely, and though it's grabbing from a slew of other horror films, there's something fundamental in their design that allows Wan to draw from their elemental power. That said, once it's clear the the demon has possessed Lili Taylor's character , the film never convincingly regains its sense of playing fairly, as the investigators would obviously work to isolate her. And there's something about how direct the film becomes after relying on suggestion that undercuts its central power.

Still, as someone prone to mocking Wan's career generally (mainly the Saw films), I kinda want to see his other film from last year.