Scares over sense.4/10
Insidious: Chapter 2, the sequel to the 2011 hit Insidious and directed by the same guy, James Wan. This is...um...less than the first...but I'm not sure if that makes it good...for me at least.
So, here's the story: Immediately after the events of the first one, the father named Josh, played by Patrick Wilson rescues his son, who possessed a supernatural ability to travel through different worlds. He came across the dark spirit world, inhabited by demons. After Josh gets his son out, it turns out he was possessed by a woman in black. Possessed, Josh kills Elise without anyone noticing. Josh's wife, Renai, played by Rose Byrne, tries to defend her husband that he wasn't responsible. While that's going on, strange activities occurs just like in the first and the scares are placed here and there for the audience to jump.
So what are the problems with this movie? Well first off, Josh being released after being suspected in murder? Shouldn't he be in custody or something? Like being held? If he's a suspect in murder, he shouldn't be around people. I know it's dramatic irony, but this is still weird. Aside from that, there are some things that aren't explained and they make no sense. I won't say anything here, but...needless to say, it's pretty hard to swallow.
The scares...they're a bit step back from the previous film. They're not bad, they're just not as subtle as the first. Also another problem. In the first film, they follow the "rule of Jaws" when they don't show the monster until the last third. Here, they show it no time flat. And they jump scares in this movie can be a little too over the top silly and I daresay-- pretty damn cheesy. In fact, that's what James Wan's biggest weakness. His scares are scary, but they are a bit "in your face". His other film, The Conjuring, worked so well because not only were there jump scares, but there were a lot of moments when you can just take in the unsettling atmosphere. James Wan does do that in his movies and he did in this, but not as much as The Conjuring did.
With all these problems, does that this movie is bad? ...not necessarily. The good stuff are the performances, the twists and how the plot explains more. But to be honest, the twist raises more questions. Never answered, of course, how the twists play out and that it does answer some questions from the first film is pretty interesting.
So, yeah. It's a mixed bag to say the least. It's not good, but it's not terrible. The first beats the sequel by a lengthy distance, but the good stuff is pretty satisfying. If you want to see it and have a jump scare fest, you won't be disappointed. I probably would see it again if I'm bored, but go ahead and see it and give your own take on it.