Subtle but filled me criteria

Rating: 9/10 (26 July 2016)

Another movie I saw at the theaters, at first I didn't expect anything from this movies even though the first one was very good, but, as every other sequence it had only two ways to go, kind of good or really bad. As the movie started with a very subtle psychological horror flick it caught my complete attention to the screen, the art and camera direction where completely stunning I can't find a single reason to not watch it, at least, for the art itself. The usage of a not really known character like the crooked man was a good shot, the personification was a bit iffy but I can't complain about it since it wasn't the real "monster" in question, but you wouldn't know that until the middle of the movie, I though it was weird that they only revealed the real monster at the almost end of the movie and yet left a bunch of little clues from start to end (for example the dreams with the nun and Valak's name in a bunch of earlier scenes), in my vision the usage of a nun didn't make much sense and wanting it or not, they didn't truly explain why Valak took the figure of a nun. But at the end I did enjoy the movie for it's art in a whole, I would totally recommend it for those of you who like good art directions (like me) and horror movie scripts in general.