“The Conjuring” and its successor, “The Conjuring 2”, follow paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren as they solve two cases of paranormal activity. I recently watched these two movies with a friend on Halloween Eve, and wanted to briefly share my thoughts.
Ed and Lorraine Warren are based on the real self-professed demonology specialists of the same name, who were born in the 1920s and gained notoriety through several investigations of paranormal activity, including the subjects of the two movies. In this, the movies kind of reminded me of “Catch Me If You Can”. Though, in “Catch Me If You Can”, Frank Abagnale is still very much presented as an anti-hero, whereas in “The Conjuring”, Ed and Lorraine Warren are presented as legitimate heroes, even saving the day when the “common folk” are ready to throw in the towel. This is a rather stark contrast to the real couple, who are often criticised as frauds in the public eye. Because of this, watching the real footage from the presented cases definitely gives the movies a bit of an extra edge, but fails to elevate them in the same way as other movies based on a true story, like “Catch Me If You Can” or “The Wolf of Wall Street” might.
Other than that little anecdote, the movies themselves are mostly fine, definitely suitable for a cosy evening with friends. They build suspense, as a horror movie should, and pay it off with the occasional jumpscare or tense scene. What I enjoyed about the movies was that they don’t follow the usual ghost story trope where one person, usually a child, is aware of the paranormal activity, trying to convince the rest of the oblivious cast. Instead, everyone who comes to investigate the activity learns very quickly that the threat is real and supernatural, which gives the movies a bit more of a “Ghostbusters” or “Phasmophobia” vibe, where the main plot point is exorcising the ghost rather than proving its existence.
When watching both films back to back, it’s clear that the second movie is using the first one as a template. This made the first half of the second movie feel a little bit long, because they largely follow the same structure. However, the second half pulls it back a bit when the movie deviates from the formula and creates a little bit of mystery and throws a few curveballs.
In summary, I rate both movies three stars. The first movie is elevated by a refreshing perspective on the horror genre, while the second one mainly flourishes in the second half, when it breaks away from the template set by its predecessor and ties up loose ends. In the end, though, both movies failed to blow my mind in a way that would make them stand out.