Reviews

Yeah the story has been told again, but the filmmakers found this new exciting perspective that really gave it a fresh note.

The writing is beautiful, relaxing, entertaining, smart and funny where it needed to be. The flow was smooth and I found the acting quite good, especially from Alex and the secondary characters. Paradis's character was a bit too monotonous and there were plenty of moments where they could've added a bit more color to it, like the Ferrari scene, the dance, the waiting in the car with the rain end of that sequence.

Despite this I found the film very enjoyable, and I recommend it to all fans of the genre.

Two very big mistakes, weird taking under consideration the quality of everything else, break the film and place it mid shelf.

The perfect boyfriend character is wronged throughout the film, and it's made even worse by the perfect introduction and promise of immense barrier for Alex to break if he's to break them up. The man is clearly in love and yet he doesn't visit Juliette for days. He doesn't even call or send a note. Some flowers to place his footprints on the narrative. He only appears when the filmmakers intend him to, which is at the peak of the sexual tension between the two characters. There are comments about how he was treated at the wedding especially by the woman who was supposedly in love with him.

And the ending, with them running up and down the hill, meeting at the hairpin and just start talking as if this is normal somehow. Really big mistakes, very strange I repeat considering the quality of all other elements.

The master is a magnificent story, incredibly crafted almost from every single angle. The characters, main and secondary, come alive before our eyes (loved Peggy), and the performances, especially by the main characters (Phoenix in particular) are masterful and worthy of the attention of many academies, not just one.

But, at the same time, Anderson loses the tempo of the film and miscalculates the lifespan of the narrative for about 30 minutes in my opinion. The desert scene comes right at that point and seems like a great ending as it is. Not for me. Anderson's dark or positive resolution, open to interpretation, is realism at it's best and completes the dark fate many soldiers find waiting for them at the exit.

But that ending came 30 minutes late. The film loses nothing by eradicating a few scenes, I can think of 2-3 proper candidates for sacrifice, a path that would've allowed millions more to appreciate this work.

Very well crafted British dark comedy with some amazing performances (the rest are also pretty good), especially by Blunt in a role so immensely distant from what she's used to. She plays Rose, a sexy-thief addicted to being sexy and thieving, targeted by a middle aged hitman, portrayed also brilliantly by Bill Nighy, after selling a forged masterpiece painting to a businessman.

The approach is brave by the creators, since they tried to subtract genuine humor and feeling, from a dark narrative which also included several murders, while also dressing with truth all scenes.

I enjoyed the film very much and I strongly recommend it but I felt that the opening failed to deliver what the film is about.

Also in several other instances mistakes or omissions were executed with the most blatant one being the holes Rose dug in Victors garden, that weren't filled with the dead assassins.

Also the ending works mainly because Blunt's performance is really good, since nothing connect the feeling of her leaving his house angry to the revelation of his true identity, to her happy return to him, especially as captive of the new killers. It makes her appear as opportunistic which is exactly what she was, not is. That's her arc, and they failed to deliver what they already achieved, in a way.

Overall, a daring attempt to something really difficult, with a pretty good end product.

With all the twisting and turning, some of them not all that bad admittedly, in essence this is a story about twins, little girls no more than 5 years old, seeking revenge for the brutal murder by fire of their mother, which occurred in their own apartment. Their mother manages to free them through the windows, but even though we don't see it, we know that she does indeed die in the fire.

The writer turns the story on its head and starts it at the very end, when the two girls, played pretty convincingly by Margot, are already at the final stage of their revenge. They have identified their mothers killer, who turns out to be their own father (i know ...), got him to employ them as potential assassins, convince him to also deliver to the same location, the famous terminal, a teacher who molested them and serves as this noodle soup in one swift action sequence.

Their molester is portrayed as a genuinely nice guy by Simon Pegg, and the character is constructed in exactly the opposite way a molester would be, pretty intentionally I might add to fool the audience. He's witty, funny, good tempered and seems to respect women, even one that comes onto his face and basically asks him to get down to some rough business.

But all these amazing coincidences, like a terminal where no one else besides the characters that serve the story appears, inconsistent characters and the most laughable intellectual theft in cinema history (since it's believe it or not portrayed as his own idea, when the limping janitor suddenly becomes the healthy mastermind - usual suspects, primal fear) are nothing compared to the fact that these 5 year old twins managed to discover their mothers secret after she died (even the murder she witnessed right before she died).

Now that's scary indeed ...

The intro of this movie is what made me want to review this film and it was no surprise to see that the Wachowski brothers were behind it. It's constructed magnificently and takes full advantage of an aspect a lot of movies fail to. The start of any film is where you grasp the audience, using their open and rested minds to your advantage.

But it's a double edged sword, and for some reason, the Wachowski's decided to do it again and again and again, basically overloading every turning point this film had, to such extend that the story was sacrificed in favor of directing art.

The final race scene has been dressed in a way that's almost unwatchable, with rapid exchange of pov's designed to deliver the grand feeling, but we're not allowed to experience the heroes big moment so everything else is simply cancelled. They have treated several more turning points this way, but doing it to that final scene can only be described as a huge mistake.

I felt almost every character except the hero but I'm not sure whether that is down to acting, or incomplete dialogue, especially during the opening sequences.

Also the Sparky character is a mystery, as we're led to believe at the end that he's the fourth brother, but throughout the first half of the film, he feels like a guest or a living in employee. Having him on the podium at the end, left me thinking that this character was also mistreated.

Color design was a little too much at times, but I didn't experience significant loss of concentration or displeasure because of it.

If these mistakes, as I perceive them, were avoided, this would've been a very good film.

The baby brother and the monkey brilliantly complement the design and fill the storyline with some very amusing moments. The big brother was also a nice twist but I'm not sure why he doesn't reveal himself at the end. Maybe their intention was a sequel, but without that, this too feels like a bit too much.

A roller coaster of emotions. Almost perfect in every single department. I don't recall enjoying a film so much in a very long time. This is a two hour 20 mins film but I must admit, time passed by like an asteroid. Elusive and beautiful ... Congrats to everyone involved in this production, especially Malek who puts on a hell of a performance. Absolutely majestic. But no movie is perfect, and even though I wished this one was, it's not. The plot point during Act 1 with the fight in their managers office where they decide to flush him down the toilet is weak. No real emotion there, despite building it up, it seems like something stopped the producers. Maybe it was a call from the man himself, the producer. Really hurt the movie. They were better off paying him a compensation of sorts. Him appearing at the end, like he is, would've been ecstasy after release if it was done correctly. The acapella in Wembley is performed without the famous yellow shirt. Big historical mistake if I'm not mistaken. Diki's character is incomplete in my opinion. He's the last one to have a dig at him, since I imagine he was the least important part of the band, appearance wise. And yet, they build him up as the one who holds them together every time they were about to explode and destroy everything. So when he has a go at Freddie, it should've been a very big moment in the film, even if he quickly dismissed him right then and there. Show Freddie crying alone right after... This is my belief about Diki. After Bob's interview where he accuses Freddie of countless sexual partners on national television, one of the members of the squad asks him why he fired him... The doctor AIDS appointment should've been a flashback when we see Freddie contemplating about AIDS, not a subsequent scene. He didn't see an AIDS add and then learned he has AIDS. He saw the add because he knew he had AIDS. The dad character is also incomplete, leaving the final acceptance scene wanting... No fights between them. No real struggle for Freddie to overcome his father grip. At the beginning he is even disrespecting him in his own house. That makes the relation irrelevant, so they either shouldn't have included it at all, or build it in the proper manner. It was a major part of his life, and a real opportunity to make the ending so much more powerful. The mother as well, or even better the whole family, considering the first song he chooses at Live Aid. Another example of how incomplete the tension among the family was portrayed... Even the sister was irrelevant. How the f was the sister irrelevant? Finally, the last song which is played during the titles, should've been included in the film. It feels as if they sacrificed one of Queen's best songs just to avoid repetition. Again I playback my initial point. I don't recall enjoying a film so much in a long time ...

Admit I don't recall the original, but I'm guessing when Agatha Cristie wrote this masterpiece, Poirot wasn't exactly famous, and he wasn't introduced as such in the book. That's the anchor that keeps this adaptation of the story firmly in the same spot and doesn't allow it to move one inch, despite the remarkable twists, theme and design of the narrative.

Problem is even if one accepts the coincidences surrounding the simultaneous appearance of all this pour souls on the same train, along with the killer who destroyed their lives, which of course is later proven that is anything but a coincidence, the presence there of, as he so eloquently phrased it, probably the best detective in the whole world, and one that in the year we live in everyone knows, completely destroys the story. Missed the first five mins, and I don't know whether the killer hunted down Poirot to ask for his help, and that's how they got on the same train, but even if that's the case, I don't see it making much sense.

I mean they managed to get the killer on the train and booked the whole trip to extract their revenge, and they invited along the only person in the world who could solve the crime. That's just trying too hard ...

Maybe a better adaptation that better suits our time would've been to start from the ending of the film. A detective calls the FBI or whatever and basically surrenders the case. I have a train full of people and a murder case I cannot solve. Please help me. And a team arrives, among whom there's a really talented young detective that manages to find that these people are connected somehow. Then break down the story in reverse ... If you have to keep the train I mean.

Nice film overall, and pretty much money guaranteed, but there's a big error in the design of the solution for the final scene with Michael and Alex. Simply stated, Alex goes into the wagon unarmed and with a camera that separates him from everyone else, by displaying him a different color in the infrared scopes of the snipers that will eventually end the fight. At a major turning point in that scene, Michael is forced to turn the gun over to Alex. That should've ended the situation right there, as the snipers should've realized that their man was now in control, and make their move or give directions for other members of the SWAT to intervene. Intentionally or not, the filmmakers chose to ignore that fact and stay with the action inside the derailed railroad car. Error becomes ever worse when later on, Michael warns another passenger not to pick up the gun, that has fallen on the floor while he and Alex are fighting. The design is completed when Michael removes the transmitter and makes it look like he's the officer they send in, and he's about to die by the person who was send in there to negotiate with. Pretty cool actually, which makes the mistake even more weird in my opinion.

Decent cinematography and even though the directing will not make you drool unintentionally from uncontrollable urge to take everything in, it is an enjoyable film. However, the film is a no go, and the mistakes in it, are quite frankly, kindergarten level. The whole picture is based on the hypothesis that a coup takes place in Russia, and the Russian president is being held ransom by the minister of Defense and his men, who are trying to force WW3. But despite the fact that pictures from an elite US commando group show the minister keeping the president in captivity and executing in cold blood three men of his personal guard, no one thinks to transmit that footage online, or simply provide the Russians with proof that their leader is held in captivity. On top of that, they're trying to keep the suspense alive by pointing out that there is no way to inform anyone of what is happening. After a point, I kept on watching just for laughs ...

I don't remember the 1st one, so I will not treat this as a sequel review, even though I understand people complaints about character inconsistency regarding Alejandro. Nonetheless, hearing the interview I personally completely agree with the character Arc Del Toro is going through. More than logical that even a Sicario will grow conscience the moment he realizes that he's now doing to that girl, pretty much what her father's assassins did to his daughter, a realization that leads to a short passage into the righteous side and not character inconsistency, seems by the end of the film, he's again back to his old self and with an apprentice this time, which I thought was a very good touch. Totally agree with everyone complaining about the excessive acting from the really talented young girl. Despite the realistic touch to the characters which I enjoyed very much, and the exemplary acting, especially from the genius Benicio, the narrative is incredibly weak. Dialogue is flat yet ok since this is an action film, but there's no specific POV we follow to really connect with the film. Incredible mistake really for a film of such magnitude. To simplify my argument, I would say that this is a film without a main character, and it's a sequel of a film with a very elevated main character. Yes in the end everything connects and we get a story, but the way it is told, it's impossible in my opinion to connect with any of the characters. What's really disappointing, is that by simply eliminating the first 15 minutes of completely unrelated extra information, they could have added a really powerful sequence of Alejandro and the little girl that could've potentially managed to connect with the audience in a much higher level, and made this an action movie, with an actual action sequence in it. But despite this, it was enjoyable and the few twists at the end made it a decent watch.

Can't think of a better word to describe this film than the one I chose for the title. Just when I really wanted it to kick up and put another gear on, it did exactly the opposite and even made me laugh with how childish this script is. I mean if you look at this from a safe distance, this is a film about a successful HR man, who is neglecting his family every day because of his jobs demanding hours. Anyways his older son gets ALL, Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, and quickly sets on a slippery slope. Dane, Gerard Butler, continues to act the way he was acting, despite now rushing to the hospital instead of his home every night. Meanwhile, at his job he has the reputation of being ruthless and occasionally screws over people in order to remain first in his bosses eyes at the end of each month. So what do we do? The kid must be dying until the final minutes of the film, at which point he miraculously comes back from the coma and the dad loses his job only to become more successful as an independent HR consultant. As I said, childish script undermines the viewers perception and offers nothing more than an hour and a half tv time for a casual family viewing.

Mistakes were plenty too, but what I really hated was the final moments when the kid is dying and Butler makes way for the daughter to hug him too, as if it was a line in the McDonald's and how obvious all is off course at the end, that the kid will wake up. The fact that he enters the room and the producers think that they maintained tension by not allowing him to know if his son is dead or not, is really the fairy dust of every proper joke. Mediocre effort, lucid, see-through script, good to very good acting at times, but all is lost inside this casual effort. The result really is a film that no one will remember ... Skip it if you can

One thing is for sure ... This movie will catch you by surprise, one way or another. Since no one can match the original Scream, not because it was a masterpiece per se, but because of the ingenuity that came to define it, you would expect a film that attempts to imitate the aforementioned classic, to be full with clever twists and scary scenes that keep you glued to your chair.

It Really doesn't do that, but the effort is there so I would say that it wasn't a waste of time. If you're not into the genre that much, you might even love it.

But since I'm writing this review, most if not all the "clever twists" are not clever or authentic and as a viewer I have to admit that I was expecting them. The subtlety of the friends inquiry about the relationships status exists, but somehow the affair becomes crystal clear. This is a major twist that the creators failed to keep under wraps.

The whole idea crumbles when you realize that basically all the kids that died have received a threat online in the form of a friend request that can easily identify the grieving father as a prime suspect, but one can point out the killers savvy tech nature as a cancelling out factor.

What really ruined it for me, is the effort to enforce their idea onto the viewers by any means necessary, like the final scene where one friend kills the other. If he somehow managed to remote control a teenage boy, then I can't really see that happening. The extreme use of several tricks other films introduced into cinema is off course another minus ...

Introducing many elements keeps the audience intrigued, but it's a two-edged sword. Even if you believe that the killer planned the whole thing to perfection and waited for the right moment, he couldn't have known the boys were to order pizza, thus delivering him two of the main characters, or that the girl, who's an absolute must plot wise, were to get delivery duties by her boss, because the delivery man called sick.

All and all, the foundations are there, the effort is also present, so if you got nothing better to do and you like the genre, go for it ...

Pretty interesting, albeit not original, theme and with some very good performances one would've expected this movie to be at least good. Doesn't even come close to that in my opinion because the most important pylon simply isn't there ... The protagonist (Bullock) gets admitted into a rehabilitation facility in order to overcome her extremely serious addiction to alcohol, and drugs? Prior to her admittance she even crashed her sisters wedding and insulted everyone, and then she almost died after stealing and crushing a limousine.

So far so good but as soon as she gets admitted all her addiction issues simply cannot be viewed by the audience, or at least I was unable to spot a single instance during all those weeks of supposedly painful recovery, of her urge to succumb to that powerful feeling this film is supposedly dealing with ...

The images are beautiful since the facility is located in an idyllic forest location and the acting is pretty good, but there is no story to be told really ... On the contrary I found it a little bit insulting towards those people who actually go though something of the same order and have to watch Sandra overcome the same problems they go through without sweating and on top of everything, she becomes a coach figure of sorts for other patients.

Ironically two other patients relapse and at least add some seriousness into the endeavor.

Starting with the obvious underwater swimming for a significant distance and then coming up right at the shore fighting to regain normal breath and then moving on to the beach scene beneath kings landing with Tyrion arriving at the same moment the guards were about to leave but somehow decides that it's no problem if they spot him and doesn't even care to hide, this episode is just mediocre. And if these are serious mistakes that make a series of this magnitude feel average then Jon's non reaction to the discovery that his brother and sister not only are alive and well but they've somehow reunited in the North is just a turn for the worse for the creators. If he can be excused for not reacting accordingly when he first read the scroll (because of the excuse he gave ... felt like just an excuse to avoid having him react normally), he certainly cannot be forgiven twice for not reaching back to them with another message or a drive thru little get together when he went back North

The initial idea is captivating but the authors cannot claim birth rights. A man (Michiel Huisman - Dylan) possesses a gift, identifying patterns in everyday life, that allows him, in a way, a glimpse into the future. Film starts with him envisioning a murder in Central Park tram station in New York city and after a brief intro of the characters the first act ends with a second vision (the 1st one could have been, or is, a flashback) that occurs while he is performing his duties as an air travel agent at JFK airport.

2 airplanes, one about to take off and another about to land are on collision course either because of Dylan's delay in issuing the appropriate directives (day dream/vision), or because of fate and whatnot. His supervisor snaps him out of it just in time and after Dylan projects into his mind the catastrophic events "math", he orders the approaching pilot to continue with the landing and the departing one to "step on it", a corrective measure that causes the two planes to come agonizingly close as they cross paths but avoid crushing nonetheless. I don't have the knowledge to support my argument but I'm pretty sure that the films initial spark lies well into the impossible and the combination of such forces would have caused both planes to crush anyway.

Furthermore, if one plane is on the ground and the other one is on the air then logic suggests that a crush is impossible and therefore one would've simply expected Dylan to order both pilots to abort landing and taking off respectively. After the incident, he's suspended for four weeks impending investigation, also the time he has left before celebrating his 30th birthday.

Visually, 2:22 feels nice due to beautifully selected shots that connect excellently and portray New York in an artistic manner that correlates with the story line but several mistakes of both script/narration and directing bring the whole structure down, right about half time.

While on leave, Dylan attends a ballet during which he sees Sarah (Teresa Palmer) and instantly falls for her. After the show, he pursues a meeting during which it becomes transparent that the feeling is mutual. I really think that Teresa Palmer is the best thing about this film. She dives very deep into character and only breaks it far down the road, where in my opinion, she, rightfully, seems to lose faith in the script, her lines and the narration.

In a very good twist, Sarah is revealed as a passenger of the flight that Dylan almost brought down, a coincidence that allows the creators to bond the two main characters even faster. Their pull is strong and the film seems to be going in the right direction with a lot of suspense, sexual tension and mystery floating around but what comes right after is simply total disappointment. The coincidences keep piling up (Sarah and Dylan have the same birthday and age) while Dylan's visions of the CP murders become stronger and stronger. Meanwhile several accidents keep happening at exactly 2:22 and Dylan is starting to lose his mind, a development that makes clear that this connection of his with the supernatural is something new and not a birth feature.

From this point on, the narrative feels forced, as if another idea is brought on to contemplate for the inability of the writer to complete his initial idea (A man who has the ability to read patterns in every day life and take a glimpse into the near future). As their birthdays approach, Dylan's "vision" of the Central station murders grows stronger and stronger until he realizes that he's actually projecting the day he and Sarah die. Now this could have been a better continuation in my opinion but the creators felt the need to mix it up and make it as complicating as possible for some reason.

So reincarnation is thrown into the mix and Dylan realizes by discovering love letters in his apartment, that his past self was murdered along with his lover in the station by the third member of the love triangle. Sarah initially has the proper reaction to his claims and almost attacks him, but for reasons not explained, she does the 180, comes back to him and accepts that they were indeed lovers half a century ago.

Continuing with the reincarnation 2nd script, her ex who is the artist having an exhibition at the gallery she works, is revealed as the killer but eventually dies in the train station murder scene, despite the fact that Dylan changes nothing, and love gets another chance.

Mistakes:

Apart from the airplanes almost crush, Dylan finds along with the secret stash of love letters, the passport of his past self. Hiding love letters makes sense. Hiding your passport with them, not so much. During the taxi accident scene, an experienced New York cab driver stops his taxi in the middle of an intersection, so that we can have our accident. We see Dylan's phone two times while he's texting with Sarah. One of her messages disappears from the conversation.

Dylan talking to himself explaining things that we can see happening is plain amateurish and so is the ending from a directing sense. Dylan gets shot by the ex and the cops are asking the guy who just tried to commit murder to drop his weapon. Usually they do that before the shot but here they chose to do it after, and almost provided the ex with enough time to finish the job. The film closes with a beautiful crane shot during which we can see that only Sarah cares about Dylan being shot in the stomach. Both cops are over the dead body of the killer simply watching while all the other people simply didn't find the shooting interesting ...

Pretty entertaining, dressed with food for thoughts throughout the storyline and even though some of the twists are predictable, like the cliché Douglas fake death resurrection and unveil as the bad guy + shadow puppeteer of the CIA, the MI6 and off course Alice, the narration was quite full for me and kept boredom to the minimum.

Not perfect and naive at times like for instance the reason behind Alice's must reintegration as an active field agent (she was the only CIA operative in the area apparently), the way Bloom was introduced, and the lake action scene where 3 out of 4 agents going silent and their separate camera feeds going out is not sufficient indication for the head of the operation that something is wrong. Eventually a phone call and plain English does the trick.

Overall unlocked is a good watch worth your time if you're into the genre.

Directing was swift and the script pretty robust which should've paved the way for even better acting and this combined with the predictability issues and naivety, are for me the reasons this movie will not overlook its competition.

PS: Even terrorists bikes get stolen.

It's hard to snipe three people (secret agents) when they're inside a van that is moving under a bridge and one of them (or two I don't recall) is sitting at the back 100% out of sight.

Weak to say the least plot. Unconvincing characters combined with pretty average to bad acting from almost everyone involved. Atrocious mistakes splattered all over the narrative and completely disorientating scenery. The fact that apparently the budget was limited offers little to no excuse for the director to deliver such product. On the contrary, it should have worked the other way around and force him and the screenwriter to double check their every turn.

For example there is some kind of chasing going on with car and buggies during which the buggies attempt to intercept the car by going further up the hill only to end up catching up with the car when it magically reemerges into the scene from a higher altitude than them. You gotta watch it to realize the magnitude of the screw up.

On top of everything, it sends all kind of wrong messages combined with some good ones, a dangerous cocktail when it comes to the supreme teacher which is the movies.

A bullied boy, just a day after he gets punched at school, goes on a hunting trip with his dad who tries to toughen him up by teaching him how to use a weapon. Nothing against hunting but the combo and its time frame is at least questionable.

The hunting starts and father and son end up hunting for deer at a location which looks more like a camping site than a deer hunting ground. The fact that the camera starts to emerge in order to show the forest, only to stop midway is childish. A guy throws a safe key where he hid a couple of million dollars a few meters away from his policeman accomplice and acts like he just threw it into an erupting volcano from which nothing can be retrieved. The father while trying to protect his son from the policeman, who managed to shoot the other guy at the right shoulder while standing 1 meter away from him and is now pointing the gun at his son (who for some reason apparent only to the creators of this film started running in a direction the crooked cop could see him, instead of going the other way where he would have been out of sight) shoots him dead on the spot, but instead of calling the other cops like any sane person would have done, takes the injured guy to his house and convinces his wife to perform a surgery on the spot.

Then they leave their kid who just witnessed a murder unguarded and the guy who got shot point blank miraculously wakes up and kidnaps both son and father while the mother tries to catch up by running behind the car, exactly like in the movies. This kidnapper, who apparently is a pretty stand up guy, ends up with the kid in a forest hideout the location to which only he and his girlfriend know.

Leaving aside the fact that Willis admits to the father that he was searching for this guy for months and was unable to locate him in this hideout, without explaining to us why, its incredible how suddenly everyone can locate this secret hideout easily and the place ends up getting packed with cops, crooked and good ones.Meanwhile, one of the crooked cops who must have broken or seriously injured his wrist trying to get out of the handcuffs the father put on him, kidnaps the mother and puts her in the normal police vehicle he was driving logically but at the scene she is forced off a range rover type of police car, while the cop also magically completely recovers from his hand injury.

After everything is resolved we get the final hammering when one of the good policemen happily gives an interview smiling about the recovery of the money, failing to realize or mention that half the police force who are now dead where the ones behind the heist.

I mean, I cannot believe the things I'm writing right now. Anyway, even though I could go on and on and on, I just hope a few people can avoid wasting an hour and a half for this. The fact that a superstar in Bruce Willis acts as one of the main characters is the true story behind this one.

Only decent thing here is the main story idea and the quite good plot point when Willis turns bad, but this makes the fact that it was shot this way even more frustrating.

If you haven't seen the movie, I urge you not to read this review as it contains spoilers and basically will ruin the whole experience.

As far as horror movies go, Conjuring 2 is among the scariest I've seen. Decent plot, a little too much at times and I wonder if the movie could have ended in the traditional 1 hour and a half, but still, worth your time if what your looking is a good shoulder exercise.

Ed and Lorraine Warren continue their search for paranormal activity this time in England, where a family is haunted by a spirit that claims ownership of their home, and apparently, the body of one of the little girls.

Story starts with Lorraine having a vision of a young boy, who, while possessed by an evil entity, murders his whole family, parents-2 brothers-1 sister, in their sleep with a shotgun. Even though the scene started with his mother yelling at him before she hit the sheets of her bed covered in blood and the blast of the shotgun, his 2 brothers somehow continue sleeping unaffected by the hell that broke loose 3 meters away. The scene continues with the brother(the viewer actually sees Lorraine as she envisions the whole massacre) entering the bedroom of his two brothersm and initially shoots the 1st boy. 2nd boy is still sleeping despite his mothers screams and the 3 shotgun booms, so he also ends up dead. Sister in a 3rd room equally doesn't hear the 4 now gunshots and subsequently ends up dead.

The Warrens eventually end up in Britain to investigate the haunted house case on behalf of the Church that wishes to put an end to the families screams. Decent acting and some pretty scary scenes follow, but before the Warrens, the police is called up to the scene, when the spirit for the first time decides to become a little too friendly with the Hodgsons. 2 officers, a woman and a man arrive to investigate and actually witness a chair without a driver, gracefully slide across the floor in front of them also in the presence of the single mother who now owns the house and a neighbor who offered to help. Scene is actually pretty good, but what follows surely isn't. After they see with their own eyes something that would make any living soul, sh*t in his pants, all 4 exit the house pretending nothing happened. No running like headless chickens, no stumbling on the floor, going through windows, or even a scream. 2 officers actually stand in front of the haunted house and explain to the lady why they couldn't file a report about it.

Plot continues with the Warren's stepping in and finally managing to defeat the spirit. While doing so a thunder cuts a tree just outside of the house in half, which was a pretty decent touch and so were the scenes inside the house up to the point that the neighbor from before attempts to chop a door down with an ax while inside world war 3 was climaxing. Movie finishes without him managing to enter that door, despite the fact that Lorraine squeezed in, and just before the end, 4 neighbors in total come to celebrate the demise of the paranormal. House is almost demolished, screams, a thunder, and in the morning no one beside the victims and the ghost hunters seemed to care.

Apart from these 3-4 mistakes in my opinion, film was actually pretty good but a little too long.