Established fright guru, James Wan (head of both Insidious flicks, Saw, as well as The Conjuring) must have gotten uncomfortable sitting in the director's chair and let John Leonetti (The Mask, Insidious cinematographer) have the top spot for the nightmare prequel that horror fans have been longing for. Right off the bat, this was bad move by Mr. Wan. The Conjuring and Insidious both fully embody the definition of a well-rounded horror film and now there's Annabelle. This film has its scares as promised but lacks the much needed balance of a storyline that its superior predecessor provided.
The Conjuring took the sound of two claps and kept us all up at night even from the previews. When the movie finally hit theaters, the audience was introduced to the story of Annabelle in the first scene. Two college coeds are cowering from the red scribbles on their walls done by the hand of a sinister doll. The film then leads into the lives of the demonologists that dealt with Annabelle and the new challenge that's been conjured up.
The brief tease of Annabelle's reign of terror in The Conjuring was alluring and chilling but even I was wide-eyed and elated to see a movie being made just about this doll. Nothing beats a prequel, right. Just ask George Lucas. There's something about the story-before-the-story that draws a crowd and what better than make it another face-covering screamfest? Annabelle showed high hopes from how well done her original cameo was but Leonetti let me down with his flat dialogue between a young married couple and the brief ounces of fear that come and go.
There's pregnant Mia (Annabelle Wallis. Yep, her real name) and intern physician John (Ward Horton, Wolf of Wall Street). They, along with their neighbors the Higgins', attend church and lend a hand when the other needs it. After the Higgins' are the victims of an unspeakably scary crime, Mia and John begin having doubts about the spiritual integrity of their home and the random findings around a doll John surprised Mia with.
You know what the doll looks like. If you don't, you'll soon realize it's eyes alone will haunt you and make you question why anyone would ever purchase it. Is there such thing as something being too scary? Almost so much that it loses credibility?
Since I didn't say anything earlier, Annabelle is based off true events revolved around a real-life doll. Now that that's off my chest, I wish the movie gave me the chills as the story behind it did. The Annabelle doll is still around to this day in the Warrens' home, safely waiting in a glass case.
 |
| Demonologists Ed and Lorraine Warren pictured with the actual Annabelle doll. |
The darkness of this movie was not fully dimmed, though. There are instances that are definitely capitalized on and reflect that James Wan was indeed a producer. [Note: watch for a sprinting toddler.] Other parts are as cliche as they are jumpy. Sudden bass drum hits maximize a moment's terror but the fun is left on the stove too long with drawn out suspense. Mr. Leonetti, you can only zoom-in to Annabelle's crooked face so many times.
The acting is from talents that have yet to be flourished but shows some promise. If it wasn't for the empty delivery of reading their lines directly from the script there could have been some genuine horror to be had. Getting a priest (Tony Amendola, Zorro saga) involved is a great scare tactic that hits home to the audience but seems forced and fake even for this porcelain exorcism. The eerie follow-up that was expected from Annabelle's story does not go down well for those in the market for an occult classic. GRADE: 5.9/10
No comments:
Post a Comment