"The Conjuring 2" = FANTASTIC SEQUEL!!! "The Lobster" is...weird

   

   When it was announced that there was going to be a sequel to the 2013 horror classic "The Conjuring", I was pretty stoked. That film is by far one of my favorite horror films and arguable one of the best horror films in the last twenty years. The thing about "The Conjuring" is that it's not just a great 'horror' movie, but a 'great movie' all together. There's always the skepticism that comes when a scary movie is 'based on true events' and unlike other horror films who rely on this idea in order to solidify their scare value, "The Conjuring" didn't. It was the attention paid to the characters and the way the story was fleshed out that made the scary parts that much more scary. You cared about the family, you cared about the Warrens. The events that took place weren't central to the story, but secondary to the characters. You can tell director James Wan cared about the people involved in the story and wanted to do the experience justice, and he succeeded. "The Conjuring" was a sleeper hit, and rightfully so.

   Of his twelve directorial credits (including the upcoming comic book adaptation of Aquaman set for a 2018 release), a little over half of James Wan's films are horror films. The guy knows his stuff. His horror movies aren't merely cookie-cutter, by-the-book, trope-filled spook-fests. They're stories with fleshed out characters and intriguing situations. With returning to direct "The Conjuring 2", given the success of the first film, I'm sure the pressure was there to deliver on the expectations that have risen. I remember seeing the first film and being freaked out by it. It stuck with me for days after, not just the scary parts but the entire film. I think I saw it twice in theaters and one might think that after seeing a scary movie once, it depreciates in value. That was not the case. It was equally terrifying the second time because the movie is just crafted brilliantly. The sequel took me there as well.

   "The Conjuring 2" takes place some years after the events of the first. The film starts with Ed and Lorraine Warren (played beautifully once again by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga) assisting in the famous Amityville case. Events that take place during that time ripple throughout the rest of the movie for Ed and Lorraine. Shaken by what happened, and tired of being mocked by the public for their work, Lorraine is hesitant to take on any new cases. Meanwhile, across the pond, the Hodgsons, a young family in Enfield, is tormented by a particularly unpleasant poltergeist, who seems to focus its attention more so on young Janet, played brilliantly by Madison Wolfe. The Warrens are asked to step in and see if the events taking place are in fact real, or just a hoax. Spookiness ensues.

   Let me just start by saying that the cast in this film is awesome. Even in the first film, the entire family was casted so well and they all acted their faces off. It felt so genuine, and it's the same with this film. Wilson and Farmiga have such great chemistry that it's hard not to just love them. They're relationship as husband and wife is completely believable. They bring a sense of warmth to the chaos that goes down. It's easy to become emotionally involved rather than just be a spectator, which most scary movies tend to make audiences do. The Hodgson family, from the single mother to the four or five kids, they all drip with believability and it's so hard not to get sucked in. That's important for these films, because the scares aren't what makes the movie scary. It's the emotional connection you gain as an audience member that heightens the horror. You want to see these people get out of these situations and when scary crap goes down, you're right there in the thick of it with them. There are some supporting characters that help prod the story along, and they're great. But really, the cast and their superb acting grounds this movie.

   The cinematography and direction in this films is just fantastic. There are things Wan does with the camera that took me back a bit. He's not afraid of using the long take, and he really knows how to build tension. This movie, more than the first, did use some cliche horror tropes to create some of the scares, but that didn't bother me, and they were so well-placed you almost didn't see them coming. With Wan's horror films, there's a running theme of having these elaborate and striking individuals. In "Insidious" it was the Darth Maul-looking 'Lipstick Man' from The Further; "Dead Silence" were the creepy Ventriloquist dolls. This film has two, and they are both creepy. One's an old man, the other is a creepy nun. They're visually horrifying and they both serve the story so well. But more so than the elements, the camera work, sound work, and overall production is just amazing. The first film stayed primarily at the farm house, isolated from the world almost. The Hodgsons live in the suburbs with high pedestrian traffic and neighbors that share walls. Wan once again was able to create a truly terrifying experience with just his camera work.

   With "Warcraft" coming out at the same time, it'll be interesting to see what movie takes the weekend. "The Conjuring 2" is at least AS good as the first. I wouldn't say it's better, but I don't really think it's worse. Like I said before, "The Conjuring" is a fantastic film all around, whereas "The Conjuring 2" is a great horror film. I don't know if that connotes a level of difference seeing as they're both horror movies, but at any rate just know that they're awesome. I've heard some people say that they liked the first movie a lot even though they don't like scary movies. My wife is one who couldn't care less about scary movies. Their predictability and campiness are major turn-offs for her. Most of the time I don't go with her to see them, but she went with me to see this one and at the end she was like "I had cold chills like the entire time!" So, for a scary movie to resonate even a little with my critical wife, that's saying something! So, if you're a fan of well-crafted cinema, and you like being scared (or even if you don't), check this movie out. It's flat out awesome.


IN A NUTSHELL...

   I saw "The Lobster" this week and man that movie is weird. In a dystopian near future, single people, according to the laws of The City, are taken to The Hotel, where they are obliged to find a romantic partner in forty-five days or are transformed into beasts and sent off into The Woods. I think the movie is suppose to be a reflection of love and relationships in our society today, but to be completely honest, my brain wants to explode when trying to analyze it. It's one of those things where you get the overall message, but it's like impossible to describe. The premise was what hooked me into wanting to see it, and that aspect is really intriguing. But everything else...


   Colin Ferrell plays this guy David who is recently divorced and checks into The Hotel. He's accompanied by a dog, who happens to be his brother, who also had checked into The Hotel but failed to find love in the allotted time. The film is called "The Lobster" because upon checking in you get to decide what animal you want to be and David chooses a lobster. Whether he becomes one or not you'll have to see for yourself. He goes through the motions for a while, then decides he doesn't want to become and animal and runs off with all the rogue single people in the woods. There he meets Rachel Weisz's character and they fall for each other and then they're broken up by the people who run things then...I don't even know. The movie comes off a bit pretentious, but I get why. How to explain that is really driving me bonkers. So, as pointless as this review seems to be, I still think it's worth checking out because "The Lobster" is unlike any other movie I've ever seen. It's got heart, intrigue, and some of the most interesting writing and acting choices you'll ever see. So go see it. Or don't. I don't know.