User Reviews (504)

Add a Review

  • I'm not sure if you're like me, where every new horror feels as if someone is flogging a dead horse, but that's exactly how I felt about Annabelle Creation. Here we go again, it's a prequel to the original. That doll is dug out, sat stationary, and all manner of nasty events happen.

    It's a very nicely made film, it's very well acted by the largely young cast, it's a good, if sad story, and there are a few decent scares. The trouble is, those scares have been done so many times, even, dare I say it throughout the franchise.

    It lacked the interesting side story that was present throughout the Conjuring films. As I say it's a good movie, but come on, give us something other then doll scares girl.
  • It's nice to watch a horror film where it gets better and better, and this one is going in the right direction.
  • This movie is th scariest scary movie I've seen in SUCH A LONG TIME! It's better and scary than the first one with a better story line and twist. I was not expecting this movie to be this good!
  • Have an appreciation for horror and there are a fair share of good to classic ones in the genre as well as a fair share of not so good and even downright bad ones. Really liked both 'The Conjuring' films so watched 'Annabelle', which was inevitably compared to them a lot, and found myself disappointingly not caring all that much for it (while not detesting it).

    Saw 'Annabelle: Creation' after hearing that it was a much better film and also that it looked quite good. After seeing it, it is agreed that it is a far superior film to 'Annabelle' in most areas. There are still faults here and major ones and it's not my definition of great, but whereas 'Annabelle' was lacklustre this just scraped above average and what 'Annabelle' didn't do well in this does much better. It has clearly not worked for some and that is understandable.

    'Annabelle: Creation' as aforementioned has issues. The dialogue is still very awkward-sounding and banal, doing little with developing rather clichéd characters, and while the familiarity of the story didn't bother me actually (although there are certainly predictable moments, and a little over-simplicity going on) the ridiculousness and illogic of the final third was less forgivable.

    Likewise with the ending, that was as rushed and anti-climactic as that for 'Annabelle'. Stephanie Sigman overacts a bit too.

    However, 'Annabelle: Creation' is a good looking film, with a great Gothic atmosphere, lush and darkly atmospheric production design and stylish photography. The supernatural effects are surprisingly excellent too. The music is haunting and the direction brings a genuine eeriness and mysteriousness, as well as much more momentum and ease, that was not there in 'Annabelle'.

    Where 'Annabelle: Creation' is vastly superior in too is that it is scarier and more interesting. There may not be an awful lot novel, but there are some nice jolty shocks, the odd unsettling surprise and some genuine suspense and dread on particularly a psychological level. There is far more momentum here and the pace is tighter. The story intrigues, while the characters may not be the best developed but they at least have personality and easier to get behind. The acting is much better here too, with the standout performances coming from Talitha Bateman and Lulu Wilson (both terrific).

    Overall, not great but a decent improvement. 6/10 Bethany Cox
  • I didn't expect a sequel to a movie I loathed to be watchable, let alone sort of fantastic, but here we are and I'm ready to say that Annabelle: Creation is a surprise in many ways. A lot of the scares work and I got a few chills here and there. Even better, many of the characters are somewhat interesting and easy to root for. I doubt it'll become some classic in the years to come, but I'm almost positive it'll be put on that rare list of movie sequels that are better than the originals.
  • I first want to gloss over Ouija: Origin of Evil, as Annabelle: Creation is heavily inspired by that film. It's a 1960s R-rated horror prequel to a lackluster origin film starring Lulu Wilson based on possession & exorcism, ultimately tying in strongly with its predecessor. As I felt Origin of Evil had strong plot development, acting (though Wilson isn't the standout here that she was in O:OoE), cinematography, and overall eeriness, I could say most of the same things for Annabelle: Creation, though I find them all just a notch below.

    Given the time period that this film takes place, the technology that was present served this film very well in the throwback sense, either because it doesn't make the characters too idiotic to not rely on their technology more often, or it doesn't allow the supernatural to manipulate their technology too much to the point of ridiculousness. Even traditional items like a bell (similar to The Uninvited), a well (similar to The Ring), or a dumbwaiter (many horror films) work because of the particular time period that it's in and add to the atmosphere the film builds up. Several elements like this were heavily in play and made for a fun setting.

    Here's where I have a mixed bag of positive/negative, and it has to do with the direction. James Wan is clearly a heavy influence for David Sandberg (Lights Out), but part of me feels like Sandberg and crew watched Wan's Conjuring films, created a checklist, and tried their best to check all of those boxes. It makes for great horror, but part of it makes me feel like I've seen it all before. If Wan was directing, I think he would find a new way to shoot certain scenes and present certain items. Given the setting I was referring to before, I saw all of the foreshadowing coming into play a bit too easily. It's like it was all on-the-nose. You also can telegraph all of the jump scares. That doesn't mean they weren't still effective and that the film wasn't still scary on its own (trust me, there are plenty of non-jump-scare moments that are still very good), but I feel like I just saw a Wan copycat instead of Wan himself is all. I mean that's not a bad thing, because I considered Wan as the new master of horror before he decided to become an action director. Just food for thought is all.

    Now I will give Sandberg some credit. He played with out-of-focus scenery more than Wan had in the past, making us look in the dark areas or the background to see if something was lurking about. I also think he included more shock factor regarding when things can occur (daytime, early stages of the film) and how at-risk all of the children really were, making them all vulnerable to victimization by injury, possession, and/or death. I also think that without a star-studded adult cast it was a lot easier to give the child actors a lot of limelight, to the point that I knew all of them really quickly (in The Conjuring, I couldn't tell you a single one's name as they were more pawns for Wilson and Farmiga). Every so often he would let the camera cut away for the scary thing to appear/disappear/move and such, but then sometimes he would just say "screw it" and do it right in the shot just to mess with the audience, who was thoroughly engaged in this film from start to finish.

    The thing I think most people have to remember about this film, which I sometimes forget myself, is that Annabelle is just a doll... creepy looking, but just a doll nonetheless. She's not like Slappy or Chucky, where the doll is the soul in and of itself. The doll may act as a conduit for the demon however; we have known this since The Conjuring. However, this demon can also do it in its own form, or into a human, or anything else that it wants to... even more than one place at a time. Makes it kind of strange that Annabelle still remains the highlight of the film by the title, but these films are less about the doll and more about the entity, and that's fine with me. I just have to keep reminding myself that.

    I want to close by saying that these films (Conjuring 1 & 2, Annabelle & prequel, Ouija & prequel) remind me a lot of the Paranormal Activity film franchise: despite a different setting and finding new ways to try and scare the audience, the story largely remains the same. Big family in big house dealing with possession and finding a way to exorcise it. Personally, I dig them all, but they aren't reinventing the wheel, so don't assume this is a fresh new take on the genre. However, given that Annabelle was so poorly received, you had to assume that if they were making this film, they likely said: "Let's make sure that doesn't happen again, so what can we do differently?" They found it, and it's called Annabelle: Creation. Very good, though I've kind of seen it before. That's okay though, because it ain't broke. I just don't know how much longer it can last and still bring in myself and other audiences.
  • SnoopyStyle24 September 2017
    The Mullins (Anthony LaPaglia, Miranda Otto) suffer a tragedy when the daughter Bee is hit by a passing car. Twelve years later, they open their home to abandoned girls. Janice is handicap and Linda is her best friend. There are four other girls and Sister Charlotte. Their world is turned upside down after Janice finds the doll Annabelle locked in the closet.

    This is a nicely made horror movie. It has nice set pieces and individual scenes. The doll and the entity serve as nice horror villains. Whether I like or love this depends on the girls. The young actresses are fine but the characters need more individuality to stand out. Janice and Linda are the main lead. While they have more screen time, they should be given even more. One of them should be in every scene. The horrors are too scattered among the girls. It would be more horrifying if Janice and Linda suffered while the others disbelieve. That should hold out as long as possible. The other girls lack individuality which make them too much like cannon fodder. I do grow to care for the girls but it should happen sooner. Overall, it's better most horrors and it's well executed.
  • A prequel of Annabelle, which was the prequel of The Conjuring. Absolutely nobody asked for this. Nobody wanted this. No one. But, thankfully (surprising, right?) we got it. 

    Annabelle: Creation has no business being this good. Funny enough, the same can be said about 2016's Ouija: Origins of Evil. It is strange that these two bizarrely similar films were released within a year of each other. Both follow up on terrible first films. Both are prequels of those terrible first films. Both shouldn't have been made. Both are extremely effective horror films. Oh, and both star the excellent child-actor Lulu Wilson. The similarities don't even end there. 

    After the film ended and I saw who directed this, everything made more sense. David F. Sandberg has the reins here–who you might remember from directing Lights Out, another surprisingly great 2016 horror flick. The work done in that movie with the use of lighting and repetition is just as suspenseful here (if not more so, in some scenes). Sandberg thankfully stamps what could have been run-of-the- mill horror scenes with his signature creativity. Horror largely relies on the talent of the director, and this is a case of the direction only elevating the film. 

    While Lulu Wilson is a definitely a standout in her second straight horror movie role, her counterpart Talitha Bateman also gives a great performance. As in most horror movies, most of the scares are seen through the eyes of the children in the film. Luckily, the two youngest actresses here–Wilson and Bateman–practically act circles around the rest of the cast. In fact, there were quite a few moments when I felt as though these two actresses deserved a better script. The pair definitely do the best they can with what they are given however, adding a great deal of character to this film. 

    The bar is low when it comes to horror film scripts. Even the best of the genre still have the occasional cringe-worthy line or plot hole (The Conjuring 2, I'm looking at you). All this to say, I'm going to go easy on the faults of Annabelle: Creation's script. The writing here is not bad by any means. There are cringy lines here and there, but that is to be expected. The characters make extremely poor choices, but even that is to be expected. The problem rests almost solely in the dull first 30 minutes of this film.

    Look, I'm all for slow burn horror movies. But when the star of your horror film is an inanimate object, you just can't afford to have a slow opening act. However, once this film starts picking up with the scares in the latter half of the film, much of that first act can be forgiven. The film goes in some unexpected directions towards the end of the film which adds some surprising creativity.

    No spoilers of course, but the way the first Annabelle is tied in to this film is outstanding. So outstanding that it almost makes up for the 90 minutes I wasted sitting through the garbage that was that first film. Almost. 

    Credit to director David F. Sandberg for rescuing this franchise from a tedious first film. Annabelle: Creation is legitimately scary, which is all you can really ask for from a horror film.
  • Annabelle: Creation, which is a prequel to Annabelle, can appeal to many horror fans because of its use of suspenseful jump scares and skin crawling scenes.

    With that being said, it does have its downsides, including some of the children's acting and occasional slow points.

    This movie has some great moments and uses the first act well at building the characters and why we should feel for them.

    When it comes down to it, Annabelle: Creation is a solid horror movie that you should definitely watch if you have the time. I highly suggest you watch the original Annabelle beforehand, as it will make Creation all the more better.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Originally, I had gone into this with very low expectations as the last Annabelle movie was a complete flop for me. Ultimately, my tune changed a bit when I saw that this one was actually getting decent reviews, which is rare for a horror movie altogether. I feel as thought there has been a MAJOR drought in quality, domestic horror movies over the past 15-20 years, but I am always keen to check out movies that are loosely based on real-life stories. Enter here- the origin story of Annabelle, although I think that this was likely not at all coherent to the real Annabelle's origin story... but who knows.

    With Gary Dauberman on board, I don't know why I expected this film to be superior than Annabelle, but the trailer looked decent enough for me to check this one out (with a Groupon- THANK GOODNESS).

    Firstly, how in the world is Bea a derivative of Annabelle? GAH. Okay, next.

    I don't want to get into an entire synopsis, because so many others will be able to do that for me. I'm happy to just be a total Grinch about it all, as I really just wanted the movie to end almost 30 minutes into it.

    As you know, these movies are tied into the other Annabelle and The Conjuring movies as Lorraine Warren, one of the protagonists in The Conjuring (Vera Farmiga's role) is the current owner of the real Annabelle doll and investigated that case (as well as Amityville, etc.) But the way that these are tied in together was done with almost zero consideration and thought and makes it all seem so incredibly cheesy- not at all an eye-opening moment of WOW... more so, a ".... really?" type of connection. Alas, what grinds my gears in no particular order: 1. Timing. I assume this was supposed to be in the 60s? In a house with electricity and modern flashlights, why were lanterns with matches used as sources of light? 2. The mother's face got attacked (and the doll mask was SUCH a wasted touch) -- why couldn't she walk? 3. If a possessed doll can break out of a covered well, why couldn't she break out of a locked closet? Obviously she could because she kept unlocking it from the inside, right? Why did she just chill in there for so long and only go after her mother- was her dad's soul not cool enough? 4. If Annabelle had been quiet for so long, why did they even bother opening their house to orphans (even though it was sought as penance)? Mrs. Mullins can't even take care of herself and her husband took literally zero interest in any of them.

    5. What was the point of having 4 additional orphan girls? They literally served zero purpose.

    6. If Annabelle was in the doll and then Janice-- who the heck was in the scarecrow? 7. When Sister Charlotte (who was a horrible actress BTW) stabbed the doll, why did that even matter since Annabelle had possessed Janice? Shouldn't she have stabbed Janice instead for it to have any effect? 8. Had Sister Charlotte never noticed that nun in the photo before? What was even the point of bringing that up for it to not be visited again at any point- really just another lead-in to The Nun movie or The Conjuring 2? WEAK.

    9. Is it assumed that Samuel stopped making dolls altogether after his daughter died? What did he even do then for a living? He had already boxed Annabelle up-- what was the point of unboxing her and keeping her? Sounded like he was an up and coming toy maker and had a big order to fill, but instead his daughter dies so he holds onto the one doll that he made (which has no correlation to his daughter in any way) and that's the vessel she chooses to inhabit. Right.

    10. WHY DID THIS MOVIE SUCK SO BAD AND WHY ARE THE RATINGS SO GOOD? The acting was atrocious (other than Talitha Bateman), the story was garbage and the tie-ins were forced and pathetic. It's disheartening that people are calling this a good movie. Have better standards, people! It is "jump" scary-- I'll give it that. But that's literally it. Nothing more. Huge disappointment.
  • Annabelle: Creation is a massive step-up from Annabelle. With great performances by the young cast, and some excellent scare sequences, Creation has more than enough to keep you up at night.
  • Annabelle: Creation is a thoroughly well-executed and thought-out medium budget horror in a creepy house with a creepy doll. It is also a borderline comedy at times, cleverly realising that the doll is not only scary but also rather ridiculous. Moving from scares to laughter and back was done with outstanding precision and taste.

    The effect where something first happens with thundering sound and action, followed by a deafening silence in anticipation of potential further threats, is somewhat overused, but excellent actors and overall professional production let this kind of small issues pass without much distraction.

    As a prequel to the previous movie which was also a prequel, the story is eventually tied to the previous Annabelle vehicle, which felt not only unnecessary but quite clunky and rushed. Stay put for a brief after-credit scene for more Conjuringverse things to come.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Goodness this movie was bad. I cannot believe the high ratings it has been getting. I am wondering if we watched the same film. I don't even know where to begin.

    First of all, little things like gorgeous, obviously made up nuns annoy me.

    Secondly, what a disjointed, cliché-riddled movie. It didn't take me long to just wish it would end.

    The plot is a joke. There really isn't one, surely not a proper one. It's the arrival of the girls, exploration of the house, scary scenes, more scary scenes, then the owners of the house reveal everything, and then more scary scenes. Throughout the film, incredibly bad, unbelieving acting. Anthony LaPaglia was the only upside for me. He managed to portray a character that was obviously grief-stricken but who would seem quite scary to young kids.

    There is so much that didn't make sense. One minute there is electricity and the next it's back to match-lit lamps and darkness. There is no reason presented to why the wife can't walk. And what the heck kind of a reaction was that to Samuel pointing out to Sister Charlotte a fourth nun in the picture, that she had never noticed before?

    And finally the pace was SO slow that I was soon yawning and even the scary scenes had absolutely no effect on me. By that point I was simply numb.

    I cannot recommend this movie. Watch it if there is no alternative and if you don't have to pay money for it.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Annabelle: Creation is a better sequel that improves over the terrible first film but not by much. Director David F. Sandberg does try to create a creepy atmosphere and tone involving dolls. Lets face it, dolls have been a master at creating fear within everyone. Even if they are just standing by as you walk around. The thought of there heads turning towards your direction can be creepy. But this being a supernatural horror movie and the doll Annabelle just creeping as it sits in the background with it continuously disappearing and showing up does make this film quite decent.

    The plot is decent. This follow up is a prequel to the first film. It follows a group of orphaned girls moving to an isolated house. Until, one girl Janice (Talitha Bateman) starts noticing some strange supernatural occurrences when she finds Annabelle.

    This being a prequel set up to how the Annabelle doll became possessed that eventually followed into The Conjuring film was pretty neat to see how that tied the origin story up. Yes, this horror movie does have a lot of clichés which would make the audience scream at these characters for making stupid decisions yet again. It is starting to become a regular habit with these horror films making characters make the dumb decisions. First, we have Samuel (Anthony LaPaglia) and wife Esther (Miranda Otto) who lost their daughter Annabelle. Later, her spiritual presence ask them for permission to host inside a doll which they grant her too so they can have their daughter with them. Does not take long, until evil finds a way to haunt the doll and affect anyone that is near it. Several years later, an orphaned girl Janice discovers the doll and notices that the demon is around the dolls presence.

    I hated the first film for a lot of reasons. This prequel is an improvement with better acting, an okay plot, better characters, and the direction tries for the classic horror set up with its creepy tone. Stephanie Sigman playing the nun to the orphaned girls gave a decent performance. But Lulu Wilson and Talitha Bateman gave great performances as the orphaned girls. Miranda Otto absent for most of the screen time, hidden away in a room cause of some illness was also decent. Even, Anthony LaPaglia was okay as a grunt guy, who decided to host his house for the girls.

    The film is slowly set up. Yes, you get some cheap jolts and scares that try to get at you. It is slowly building up in the first hour of the film. It has the occasionally having characters see a creepy doll in the background or its head facing you. The climax is a payoff when everyone is at stake when the girls are trying to escape the house of horrors and appearances of some demonic being chasing them. It does put you on the edge of your seat thrills.

    Like most horror films, this one suffers from its typical clichés with its script. A house with several people living in it and a young girl gets chased in the middle of the night and starts screaming and making noise. And everyone is still fast asleep. She even gets tossed towards walls and across a room and no one wakes up. Must be some thick walls in an old house. Also, Janice is in a wheelchair and outside the house with several girls playing in a close distance. And some mysterious figure pushes Janice into a shack. And she is screaming as this is happening and the girls playing does not even notice her.

    Annabelle Creation is a fair horror film. May not be better than The Conjuring films. Definitely better than the first film. The acting and creepy direction is good. It does have a slow first hour of the film which can be boring at times. And have its clichés of stupid characters and no one noticing at close distance logical. It could have been a whole lot worse.

    I give the film 3 out of 5 stars.
  • The fourth entry in The Conjuring universe, Annabelle: Creation serves as a prequel to the 2014 spin-off titled Annabelle, which served as a prequel to the original Conjuring film. And considering the critical drubbing that Annabelle received, this film makes for a delightfully horrifying time. Twelve years after the death of their young daughter, a former dollmaker and his wife decide to let a group of six orphaned girls and a nun move into their home. The film primarily follows two of these girls, Janice and Linda. There, strange events begin to occur that eventually lead to the creation of the eponymous character. Director David F. Sandberg, who made his directorial debut last year with the micro-budget horror feature Lights Out, crafts an atmospheric thriller that genuinely surprised me. Despite the generally positive critical reception that Lights Out garnered, I was underwhelmed upon first viewing. Despite some inventive scares, the film failed to take full advantage of its premise. However, that isn't the case for Sandberg's latest.

    Perhaps the film's most surprising attribute is the strong performances from the predominantly young cast, despite their relatively weak development. Lulu Wilson, who starred in another prequel-to-a-prequel (last year's Ouija: Origin of Evil) that received generally positive reviews, turns in a solid performance as the young Linda, who must contend with the haunting presence of the Annabelle doll manifesting itself into her best friend Janice. Wilson powers her way through any questionable character choices solely on the strength of her work. On the other hand, Talitha Bateman, playing the polio- afflicted Janice, handles her character's progression nicely, turning into a genuinely chilling presence as the film progresses. And despite being underutilized, Miranda Otto, who plays the Dollmaker's wife, gets some of the film's more shocking moments.

    While Sandberg is a bit too content to play around with genre clichés (we get the requisite amount of scenes involving possession of inanimate objects, crucifixes, praying, and characters opening doors that they probably shouldn't have opened), the film's R-rating feels liberating. Considering that Lights Out was rated PG-13, a lot of its scares never reached full intensity as they were often obscured or otherwise cut short. Sandberg doesn't use the R-rating to deliver heapings of gore and blood, but instead to fashion the film into something that feels refreshingly more atmospheric and intense when compared to his previous work.

    Indeed, Sandberg manages to (ahem) conjure up some shocking imagery as he uses some of these genre conventions in refreshing ways. In one particular scene, we painfully watch as an unseen entity breaks someone's fingers one-by-one as they clutch as a crucifix. This scene makes for one of the film's thrilling highlights, amplified by the atmosphere that Sandberg has established. Thankfully, Sandberg takes his time to establish these characters, refusing to rush into the scares without first making us care about who will be in the crosshairs. And we do care about these characters, especially Janice and Linda, whose friendship serves as the film's emotional core. While Sandberg unfortunately substitutes a bit of the build-up with a few cheap jump scares, by the end of the film the tension is palpable.

    Additionally, one of the better aspects of Sandberg's film is that it just feels well-made. Obvious care went into making a believable period setting (the film is set sometime in the late '50s) and it shows through every frame of the film. Cinematographer Maxime Alexandre's camera work also surprised me. In particular, a long take early on in the film that shows the young girls running through the house upon arriving shows that Sandberg cares more about crafting a solid horror film than most of today's horror filmmakers. While Annabelle: Creation ultimately doesn't break any new ground or reach the high bar set by the film that inspired it, it still makes for a solid summer horror outing as the summer draws to a close. Featuring strong performances, a delightfully eerie atmosphere, and its fair share of scares, the film delivers on more of the potential that director David F. Sandberg exhibited on his debut feature. I will say, however, that I strongly dislike watching horror films with a big crowd. Keep the commentary to yourself, folks.

    Rating: 7/10 (Good)
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I enjoy the first Annabelle it not that good but also not that bad like many people say.When they announce the sequel will be directed by David F. Sandberg i get very curious because his movie Lights out came out last year surprise the hell out of me.The movie itself still heavily rely on loud noise,false scare and jumpscare but i find this one very enjoyable.The cinematography definitely better when it provide many place to supernatural things to happen.The characters full of clichés with two stand out performance by Lulu Wilson and Talitha Bateman.The final moment is bloody with a ending tie neatly with the first one make a good summer horror movie.There also a brief appearance of a character make me exited for the next movie in James Wan cinematic universe so highly recommended
  • hesty_mustikadewi10 September 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    Creepy creepy creepy.For those who love horror movie,yeah this is what you are looking for.Its better than the first annabelle,but unfortunately the story is boring and easy to guest.Griefing parents try to resurrect their deceased daughter but get evil demon instead,they never learn,haha.I think the interesting part is the last minutes (why they always do that),it shows relation between annabelle 1 and 2,they even bring "the real annabelle doll" (i think its called marie ann doll,sorry if i mistake) to add the creepinesss
  • This movie was dope everyone giving bad reviews either didn't have surround sound or were just on their phone the whole time like a 5 year old
  • Many good horror movies rely on a gimmick - the clap clap from the first Conjuring, Freddy existing only in your dreams from Nightmare on Elm Street etc. - and clear rules that the monster/creature/killer follows. The gimmick entices the viewer and gives us a hook or perspective on the story and the rules creates the foundation of this world and this is where Annabelle struggles.

    First of all there's no clear hook or gimmick and much like how the second Conjuring decided to throw in the crooked man this movie decides to throw everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. It's also very unclear what the rules are since the "presence" (we'll call it that) is sometimes prohibited by mere physical obstacles but teleports around at other times as well as somehow being in two places at once with no explanation. I'm fine with a creature essentially teleporting but you can't mix and match features the way they do in this film without it losing some of what makes it endearing.

    The child actors are mostly fine as are the whole crew but the writing does little to necessitate such a large amount of kids. We get to know very few of them and it's not like they're treated like cannon fodder for the presence either. Actually I think having so many kids somewhat subtract from the horror since I subconsciously know that are major studio won't run around killing children in their movies.

    The ending of the movie is perhaps the worst part. It doesn't work because of three reasons. Since there's no set rules there's no clear end game scenario and the horror just kind of fizzles out because the run time needs it to, secondly the very last part of the movie just don't make sense to me and thirdly the beginning of the first Conjuring movie don't add up after what is set up in this movie.

    With that said you'll get a few scares out of Annabelle: Creation and it's a perfectly passable horror movie that is going to rake in money and put further faith into The Conjuring cinematic universe even if it does very little to add any depth to said universe.
  • Annabelle: Creation, is the latest film from The Conjuring franchise. It tells the story behind the creepy doll from previous movies.

    The movie, in my opinion, is not as good as people and critics are saying, but not as bad as the first Annabelle movie. On the positive side, we have good acting. The lead girl, who played Janice, was excellent. The cinematography added to the creepy atmosphere, and there's at least a couple of very well done creepy scenes.

    On the negative aspects, well, the movie does nothing different to stand above it's predecessors; i knew when a jump scare was coming, every single one of them is predictable. The story is very simple and the execution was, well, not bad, but it made the movie feel very familiar. And i think the movie is just a little overlong, the final sequences really broke the eerie atmosphere it set in it's first act.

    It's not terrible, and it can be a fun time at the movies but, the movie is just so average that i don't know if it's really worth it. Well at least for horror fans, since much better horror movies have came out this decade.
  • Was lucky enough to see an advanced screening the other day and was glad I went!

    Not only was it a good horror movie, it was also actually a good movie! The story line was solid and made sense. Far more creepier than the original Annabelle, yet I found I didn't jump as much as I did in the first film. Yet the atmosphere it created left me on the edge of the seat the whole movie. Which to me is far better than jump scares! The movie also had very few slow/boring parts if any. Some characters do make stupid decisions which can be frustrating, but same goes for all movies. All the actors in the film were really good, which surprised me since most are so young. They're are a few hidden easter eggs throughout the film that fans of Annabelle and the Conjuring series will probably notice, which was really neat/surprising to see! This movie also ties in perfectly the the first film in a very surprising way that made the crowd of the theatre actually gasp in shock.

    Anyways a great horror movie and a great addition to the Conjuring Universe! Will definitely see again when it officially comes out! One of my favorite movies of the year.
  • This isn't as good as either of the 1st two conjuring flicks, but it a lot better than the other Annabelles, the Nun and Curse of...I think the film has a nice slow buildup and the final scary sequence keeps you guessing without devolving into complete nonsense.

    The direction of this film is really solid. It reminds strongly of the 1st Conjuring where much of the horror comes from implication and restraint. Unlike much of the other flicks in the series this one doesn't throw everything at the wall. It is just the doll and the goat headed demon as the spooky stuff present.

    The acting of the kids is quite good as well. So much of these fanciful flicks depend on the actor buying into the premise. Here the younger cast does just that.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    First, a car wouldn't cruise by a stranded family trying to replace a tire and not slow down. Second, even a kid would have instinctive enough to not bolt out into the road when they're in the middle of nowhere and there's a car coming, especially on a dirt road. Even though the kid's on the far side of their handicapped car, she can hear the car coming. All throughout the movie thereafter, the victim screams only a portion of how much she ought to; it's like she's forgotten she has vocal cords. And the unrealistically little screaming she DOES do is never heard until it's too late. Everyone around her has ridiculously selective hearing that it's like they're deaf until the victim's already screwed. She also keeps turning her back on the doll that's obviously creeping her out to death. The second girl's even worse. She doesn't scream at ALL, just lets the spirit keep suspending her. And not just that but why scram around to the top of your bunk bed? Run out of the room! Get away! Last, it's so horror- typical for only the areas right in front of a window with sun shining through to be well-lit while every other spot around the house is dark, even pitch-black.
  • killercharm24 June 2022
    Scary. The visuals are great jumps and the scares are more than just jumps. A couple lose their daughter to a car accident. A dozen years later they invite a homeless catholic orphanage for girls to come live in their ramshackle, nearly empty home out in the country. What could be better for raising girls? Nothing, except a home without Annabelle.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Best Movies.For more detail about Erik Desando.After graduation from Flagler College in St. Augustine Florida with his BA Erik DeSando's career began as a casting director working on a variety of film and TV projects including the Leprechaun series, the Hawaiian Series "Heavenly Road, and many other projects. He opened the Identity Talent Agency in 1998 (www.idtalent.com) and was involved in the careers of artists such as Eva Longoria, Paula Abdul, Meghan Markel, Luis Garcia, Mario Lopez, and over 80 actors on TV series. In 2007 Erik opened the kids production company "Be" opening 4 California offices and 3 TV studios and produced 5 series on the CW and a number of cable networks. Because of the economic collapse of 2008 Erik's company Be lost his children's production business and went to work with his former agency partner who had bought the franchise for Miss California USA. The relationship was a success and in 4 years Erik and his team were able to set every record for state recruitment in Miss USA history and were given the opportunity to recruit in 7 states for MUO.
An error has occured. Please try again.