I love Wan's style, BUT...

Rating: 6/10 (23 August 2013)

the last reel of this movie is a mess: jammed with action and effects, and most of these are heedless of what's come before. It's as if, when the screenwriters become hasty to draw everything to a close, their previously careful characters become similarly reckless and even dumb. The happy/huggy ending skips a bunch of nagging details--because, *really*, this family is left in a world of pain...
There is also the annoying "Based on a true story" conceit, which drags this nonsense (nothing wrong with honest nonsense in movies, per se) into real-world considerations, like: Can kidnap, assault, & attempted murder really be remedied by a DIY "exorcism"? Aren't these "demonologists" breaking the law themselves? (Real talk: "demonologists" are as "real" as Abraham Lincoln the Vampire Slayer.) A "true story" brings up these ethical/moral questions - that's how it goes...
What's with the trend of new movies stealing from/returning to "Poltergeist"? First "Mama"; and now "The Conjuring"...
Every great bit of Wan's economic style in "Insidious" is denied, in this movie. And the presence of Lili Taylor reminds me of that miserable time 14 years ago watching the lousy "The Haunting"...