Regie:
James WanKamera:
Don BurgessMusik:
Joseph BisharaBesetzung:
Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Madison Wolfe, Frances O'Connor, Lauren Esposito, Benjamin Haigh, Simon McBurney, Franka Potente, Patrick McAuley (mehr)Streaming (6)
Inhalte(1)
"Saw"-Regisseur James Wan verfilmt erneut einen authentischen Fall aus den Akten der bekannten Dämonologen Ed und Lorraine Warren, die von Patrick Wilson und Vera Farmiga verkörpert werden: Die Warrens reisen nach London. Dort wird Peggy Hodgson, eine alleinerziehende Mutter von vier Kindern, in ihrem Haus von heimtückischen Geistern gequält. (Puls4)
(mehr)Kritiken (14)
Ich hatte den ersten Teil nicht gesehen, und schon der Trailer für den zweiten Teil verursachte bei mir Gänsehaut, aber ich beschloss schließlich, ihn mir trotzdem anzusehen. Innerhalb des Horrorgenres ist dies definitiv ein überdurchschnittliches Stück Filmkunst, bei dem die Spannung durch Andeutungen bis hin zu ehrlichen Schrecken sehr gut aufgebaut wird und die dichte Atmosphäre stellenweise ernsthaft mit der Kettensäge durchgesägt werden könnte. Die Besetzung war großartig, die Geschichte und das Drehbuch waren gut geschrieben und nicht so vorhersehbar, wie es oft der Fall ist. Ich habe mir bei mehr als einer Szene die Finger vor die Augen gehalten - ich bin kein guter Zuschauer solcher Filme -, aber zumindest ist klar, dass der Film bei mir die gewünschten Emotionen hervorgerufen hat, also hat er wie geplant funktioniert. Solide zwei Stunden Grusel, die einen wirklich nicht zur Ruhe kommen lassen.
()
Im Hinblick darauf, dass sich Wan bei der Fortsetzung der besten US-amerikanischen Geisterangelegenheit der letzten Jahre Zeit ließ, ist der Film überraschenderweise nicht überraschend. Neulinge müssen von seinem famosen Stil überwältigt sein, er ist einfach auf einem höheren Niveau als alle anderen Gespenster weit und breit. Diejenigen, die ihn aber schon gut kennen, brauchen im Drehbuch einen hinzugefügten Wert. Und den gibt es hier nicht. Der Wechsel nach England ist erfrischend, aber bei der Ermittlung der Geschichte von Hodgsons machte man in den Genre-Klischees drei Schritte zurück.
()
Etwas schwächer als der Einser, der weniger auffällig und explizit war. Die ersten zehn Minuten zeigt sich jedoch, dass Wan ein Timingmeister sowie der Misanszenearbeit ist, durch welche sich die Kamera mit erschreckend deformierender Selbstverständlichkeit hin und herbewegt. Ehrlich gesagt habe ich mich nach außerordentlich intensiven und schmerzhaft in die Länge gezogenen Gruselszenen gefragt, wie viel ich noch ertragen kann, doch zum Unglück folgt eine Passage pathetischer Gespräche, eine Ode an die christliche Ehe sowie das Geschick von Patrick Wilson, der es schafft Elvis zu singen, zerbrochenen Schrott zu reparieren und auch noch Satan zu vertreiben. Die Vergötterung der Ehegatten Warren ist diesmal jenseits eines nachsichtigen Lächelns, denn dieser Film vermag die Schärfe des Anfangsteiles nicht zu erreichen. Dennoch verliert die gespenstig satanische Extravaganz nicht an Schärfe, was man am meisten zu schätzen wissen wird, wenn man am Abend nach dem Film das Licht ausschaltet und das Ganze sozusagen heranreift. P. S. Ui, Marilyn Manson kommt da schauspielerisch mehr als gut mit ... wie in den guten alten Tagen des Antichristen. [70%]
()
Unglaublich, dass es Wan immer wieder so gut hinbekommt. Die gleiche Geschichte, dieselben Horrortechniken, Tricks und Kniffe. Aber siehe da, es funktioniert immer wieder. Euer Vorsatz, dass euch James dieses Mal nicht kriegt, wird schnell zunichtegemacht und wenn nicht schon allein das Intro in Amityville Horror, dann wird euch die folgende Schreckensnacht in einem Londoner Vorort definitiv überzeugen, dass es im Kino nicht nur gruselig zugeht, sondern so richtig Scheiße läuft. Wieder haben wir eine absolut großartige erste Hälfte, in der der Regisseur aufs Ganze geht und euch nur minimale Atempausen gönnt. Die Intensität des Schreckens nimmt an Geschwindigkeit zu und einige Schockmomente lösen fast einen Herzinfarkt aus. Es ist jedoch schade, dass es nach der Ankunft der Warrens deutlich an Tempo verliert und erst am Ende Fahrt aufnimmt. Langeweile droht jedoch definitiv nicht - Wilson ist sympathisch, Farmiga eine fantastische MILF und abgesehen von einigen humorvollen Momenten begeistert vor allem die Kamera, die mit dem Raum im Haus wirklich großartig spielt. Den Film bereits als einen der besten Horrorfilme des Jahres zu bezeichnen, ist natürlich noch zu früh, aber die Konkurrenz wird in unseren Kinos schwer zu finden sein. Qualitativ ist er nämlich vergleichbar mit dem ersten Teil. P.S. Wenn ich dieses eklige Bild zu Hause hätte, könnte ich nicht schlafen. (90%)
()
What do we have here? Two solid jump-scares, but otherwise it's a compilation of the most overused horror tropes and techniques we've seen in dozens of other genre-related films, and the 1970s horror films Wan refers to did it better. On top of that, there's a script that's just stupid, to the point of slamming the door louder than the ghost could. In the first half, Wan is still coaching with ease, but the second half is just a festival of stupidity and ineptitude. During some scenes, like the interrogation of the ghost ergo the girl with a mouthful of water, I felt ashamed of the filmmakers. But I won’t condemn Wan, he still knows how to polish a turd, like in the excellent prequel, which was simply better in many ways.
()
Conjured by the mainstream. Exactly the same as the first one: almost flawless craftsmanship wrapped in ghost-story clichés where nothing really interesting happens. No tension, no surprising twist, not even any interesting jump-scares (there are jump-scares, and they are effective, but they are classic, nothing fun). The ghosts also look pretty weak from up close, the scariest one is the portrait of the nun. It’s more than two hours long, completely unwarranted given how simple everything is. The efforts to generate fear for the character of Ed Warren are in vain, in the previous film nothing happens to anyone in the end, and it’s clear that nothing will happen to anyone here, either. In short, a horror safe space, which is exactly what horror shouldn’t be. It can be safely recommended to the people unable to appreciate indie horror films with higher artistic values, that are also sharper and more demanding on the viewer (knock, knock). Unfortunately these days studios won’t offer anything better. The first time was a lot of fun, but, if we count the Insidious films, this is Wan’s fourth stop in the same building already, and that’s too much. For the next one, he should stay in the genre, but pick another sub-genre.
()
Wan is doing the same thing for the thousandth time, but he still knows how to tighten the strings famously, even though he uses the same thing and you actually feel a bit ashamed that you keep eating it up ("My home!"). This is true of the first half. The second half is a bit of a muddled screenwriting mess, where the supremacy of the ethereal child cast is ended by special effects and narrative imprudence. The first film is dramaturgically tighter, although it is actually about the same thing.
()
I’m glad that James Wan didn’t turn his back to the horror movie genre, as he had originally claimed, and that he filmed another mysterious story from the life beyond the stage. And I honestly say that I ignored the illogicalities – and there were quite a few of those – and I was enjoying the high-quality cinematography, which took me to places I didn’t expect and that also told a story that was interesting from its beginning to its end. I also have to add that I liked how the director didn’t necessarily lean only towards the horror movie as a genre and that he had a go at a couple of funny moments executed in proper British dry humor. I also thought that some of the scenes that looked like they fell out of Tim Burton’s head were pretty great. I simply didn’t watch this movie to get scared. I was mainly looking forward to the movie telling another ghost story, which is something that has been quite fashionable recently.
()
130-min footage is treading water in terms of genre. Moreover, it´s treading the same water that hundreds of movies already did before (literally, Enfield has already been portrayed before) and in the same style and in a better way (and also in a worse way, that´s for sure). Wan knows well what he is doing, but he still was unable to reveal scary scenes too early (which is his long-term and recurring weak point), so instead of being frightened to death you are only surprised that you are supposed to be scared. On top of that, the running time that includes a lot of padding is simply way too long. Another weak point is that movie is too flashy and some scenes are just randomly put one after another. Thy only thing what is missing apart from demon, scarecrow from a nursery thyme, obsessive child and poltergeist is clown, Ash with a chainsaw or Ghost Busters. On the other hand, in addition to the excellent craftsmanship, it´s well-paced and has several brilliant scenes that still keep the whole thing afloat. So, as a result it´s Wan's standard, only this time much longer and honestly, when did you see a continuation of a scary movie in the movie theater, which despite all its weak points was also a quality film?
()
James Wan's The Conjuring 2 was the clear dark horse of this year, and even though I find it a bit weaker than the first part, it will probably still take the first place this year. Wan's signature is evident in every aspect. Excellent camera work, impressive interiors, when a scare is supposed to come it doesn't and vice versa (Wan is just great at this), and I have to praise the villains, the Nun and the Crooked man were so amazing that I want to see a solo movie with them (The Nun is even confirmed already). The first hour suffocates with a pretty aggressive pace where almost every five minutes you don’t know what's coming next, but after the Warrens arrive there is a pretty long pause where I was bored at times, for which I also take off a star. The finale, though shorter, is decent. The exorcism in the basement in the first one was more intense though. As far as scares go, only two impressed me, but that's more due to the number of horror films I've seen and my resistance to scares. There isn't and won't be anything better in the horror genre, and that needs to be acknowledged. Story 7/10, Atmosphere 9/10, Gore 0/10, Visuals 8/10, Action 6/10, Suspense 8/10, Humor 3/10. Entertainment 8/10, Scares 7/10. 85%.
()
Wan has obviously run out of horror ammo. Visually, it again attacks the atmospheric mastery and imagination of Guillermo del Toro, but in terms of content it’s desperately boring and mired in scenes that are simply passé given the genre's recent years. The runtime reeks of an attempt to establish the warmest possible sympathy with the victims and Warren, which is understandable, but the horror filler is so bland this time that we are left with creative intentions rather than a truly "ghostly" and nerve-wracking experience. The day after the screening I hardly remember a single truly scary moment, apart from the hilarious final 15 minutes. The simpler and more straightforward Lights Out stuck in my head incomparably more. 50%
()
Camera looks left – nothing. Camera looks right – nothing either. Camera looks left again – still nothing, so it looks right again – nothing. Something falls from above. INNOVATION!!! Wan really tries his hardest, and his smooth sailing of the camera through the house at atypical angles keeps the boredom-bar still somehow hovering around average, but you can't win if your story is as worn out as the socks of a child with cerebral palsy. I like him better when he's filming footage of Paul Walker's funeral than when he's chasing a pissed-off nun around the house. Farmiga and Wilson aspire to be the whitest, straightest couple ever to grace the movie screen.
()
I was a bit worried that James Wan might just recycle what worked in the first film for the second one. But the new case provided fresh opportunities for the director, so the sequel works surprisingly well in this regard. The setting in England was a pleasant change for me; I was glad to leave behind the abandoned house from the first film :D But rest assured, The Conjuring 2 has plenty to offer in the horror genre. Going through real recordings and reading about the case is pretty frightening, and not for the faint-hearted. Wan managed to translate that onto the screen perfectly; the chilling atmosphere once again keeps you glued to your seat, and all the performances are top-notch, especially the young girl Janet, who handled her role like a true professional. Sure, the more action-packed ending is a bit far-fetched, but I understand that it served a purpose in dramatizing the conclusion. It's half a point down from the first film, but on the other hand, no horror films from the past decade come close in terms of quality :) 8/10
()
I finally went to see a horror again in the movie theater and I don't regret it at all. James Wan has once again shown that he has mastered his craft and that he is capable of making a great horror film that will be over two hours long and still weigh you down with its atmosphere for most of the time. A beautiful example of how when you have the money and the skills, anything is possible. Fortunately, the money is quite visible here.
()
Werbung