Annabelle: Creation (2017) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
267 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
completely nonsensical horror movie
dhaupt-791562 September 2017
Warning: Spoilers
i don't understand how you can call this movie average, let alone good. it has problems in pretty much every event that ever happens.

* what are the rules?

-> the demon can be exorcised by a priest easily, as shown at the end

-> the demon is immune against crosses and prayers, as shown in the middle of the movie

-> the demon can be imprisoned in a room if bible pages are glued around it

-> the demon can easily escape from said prison at the end of the movie

-> the demon can teleport

-> the demon cannot teleport

-> the demon can possess people without their agreement

-> the demon needs permission to go into a puppet

-> demon fails at possessing the mother because... no reason

-> bonus demon appears out of nowhere in scarecrow. or is it the same? did he get permission?

-> demon can appear as ghost girl and demon nun as well as he pleases, doesn't need to stay inside the puppet that it is bound to

-> demon is extremely strong, can rip people in half, but a girl stepping on its fingers causes too much pain to keep following her

seriously, make up your mind.

* how stupid are the characters? -> the demon is clearly dangerous, but let's enter the house again for no reason.

-> let's absolutely not make sure the demon stays inside the room by putting a layer of concrete around it. no, a wooden door will suffice.

-> let's not talk to each other. we must absolutely experience the scariness one by one.

-> let's not believe each other, even though nobody has a reason to lie.

-> demon: let me stay in puppet form and let myself be thrown into the well and only then transform back. why? because i want it to last longer.
117 out of 160 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What a waste of time and money.
Ana Silva (Anaslair)20 August 2017
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.
65 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Why why why!?
meggens25 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
How can this movie have such a high rating? I went to see this one in theaters tonight because I thought it would be good. Instead all I got were some cheap loud sound scares. There was nothing really scary about this whole movie. Every time I thought something scary would happen I got disappointed by a loud sound effect and a flash image.

I kept wondering the entire movie why certain characters would do certain things like:

Why go back in the room when they know it's dangerous. Why won't they talk with each other whats going on in the house. Why go back in the house after the things that happened. Why create an orphanage in a house the owners know is haunted. And why stay there after the horrible event that happened 12 years ago. Why sit in front of an open door staring in the abyss shooting a toy gun. Why not unbuckle the belt to free yourself from the chair? Why not freak out and flee while you can after seeing the man of the house sucked dry and dead on the floor? Why is there no lights in the house?

The story writers probably think the people who go and watch this movie are stupid or something. As viewer you already know whats going on, the movie characters also know whats going on, but they all just stay there and let it happen, making dumb decisions as the movie progresses.

They are just lucky the demon is even more stupid then they are..
90 out of 136 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
How is this movie getting such good reviews? Have our standards really plummeted this much?
buenoschiches17 August 2017
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.
85 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Way overrated. I walked out
Mike LeMar16 August 2017
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.
50 out of 75 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A prequel of a prequel has no business being this good. 
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.
119 out of 199 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Better than the first!
Drank2220 July 2017
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.
96 out of 159 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Just another generic, poorly executed and passable horror film
Danielpotato22 August 2017
Annabelle: Creation

Where can I find 100 words to describe this movie? A horror film so generic, after seeing it in the movie theaters, I have already forgotten the most content of this supposed "good horror movie".

So selfish and so poorly executed (for a budget of 15 million, better Filming locations could be found).

We have a handful of generic characters written in the most generic way possible. The traditional sick character of the horror movies (Janice), the only friend (Linda) that is with her and the traditional characters that are basically irrelevant to history. Why this movie has so many characters, but only 2 characters are relevant to the story (the two girls - Janice and Linda), and for what, does the other four girls exist?

In that, the only thing that make this movie is to have a useless sub-plot and the remaining girls are to be scared by a useless scarecrow ,by the way, this demon has nothing to do with the one that control Janice. Unnecessary, I know.

That leads to the conclusion why this film have so many characters and the only way to insert them in the main plot of the film was to create this irrelevant sub-plot , that only serves to distract the public from the main story, even if from since the beginning there was never interest of the writer to develop and create a relationship with the public and for this to the public, if these characters die or live is so irrelevant as the film itself.

The reason why films like The Exorcist and Ringu proved and were a success, it was because the filmmakers are focused on a single central character and created the story around this same character. A large number of characters never meant quality. Having a lot of useless people to the story adds nothing to the quality of the movie. Not to mention the poor acting of the main casting (especially from Stephanie Sigman). Not to mention again (without success or quality) that the filmmakers tried to copy some shots from films like The Exorcist and Ringu (just look especially when the kids went to pay a visit to the water well). A horror movie that will only satisfy the genre's weekly fans, but for the rest of the public, just another generic, poorly executed and passable horror film, with nothing new to bring. To be avoided, no doubt.
40 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Creation Of a Better Prequel!
rgkarim10 August 2017
So many years ago, the Conjuring dropped into theaters and opened up a movie universe that would bestow nightmares to the audience members who saw it. This weekend, the latest installment in this haunted world with Annabelle Creation. A prequel to the last film, this possessed doll continues to be a popular figure head in the occult series to warrant another film. Is this film a fitting addition to the franchise, or is it another money grabber fit to be lost in the horror archives? Robbie K here to help answer those questions and share some thoughts. Let's get to work.


Answers Questions: The first Annabelle gave the doll some basis and established her deadly legacy, but it lacked any true backstory of her creation. The prequel, as so titled, helped fill in the creation story and establish the origin to its possession. As the film progresses, more of the Annabelle's journey is revealed, alongside a closer look at the creature that uses it as a puppet. While not fully complete, we now have the connections needed to make sense of the first movie, and further engross us in the universe. Unfortunately, the name, the involvement, and other details of the demons still remain unanswered, but can be extrapolated with a dialogue hints.

The Pace: Horror movies can have pacing issues at time depending on the story. Fortunately, Annabelle Creation's moves at a decent pace to maximize the movie. Slow enough to provide build up for the scares, but fast enough to keep everything moving and on edge, the production team did a nice job keeping you invested in the movie. There is little time between all the craziness, with just enough comedic relief to relieve the tension and keep things interesting.

Scares: I guess we need to talk about the main element you go for these movies huh? The scare factor is at an all-time high in this movie, continuing the Conjuring's legacy of keeping things dynamic, fun, and suspenseful. Annabelle's creepy on so many levels, starting with the realistic setting to place the movie in. That realism and the use of shadows has your imagination on fire trying to fill in the gaps of what lurks in the dark. Once the subtle components are set, you can bet there a number of creepy tricks played in this film, alongside the fleeting glimpses of the demon that terrorizes the family in his cruel game. And of course, there is that doll. It's soulless stare and deceiving smile continue to give me the willies, and had a number of audience members using colorful language before involuntary rising from their seats.


Character stories: The movie had a lot of characters to play in our haunted setting. The protagonists of the film held a lot of potential to develop as characters, and unfortunately, they failed on that level. Sure, you can piece together the simple origins placed before you, but I would have liked more insight into the girls' origins or perhaps a little more integration of Bee into the writing to help maximize scares. With the conjuring able to unearth their demons and dreams in a quality manner, Annabelle should be able to mimic that magic. Scares do not equal perfect horror movie.

Pointless characters: Remember the big family in the Conjuring and how each sibling, parent, and exorcist were part of the tale in some way. That's gone too. Annabelle Conjuring brought a large group into the home, but only about four-five of them have any real involvement in the plot. The underutilization of these characters tripped up the plot, made for ridiculous scenes that didn't have as much importance, and really left me asking, what was their point. One girl has just one line and a few stares at the camera. Why include them if you aren't going to use them to develop the characters, or at least try to work together to escape the demon's wrath.

Predictability: Scares are getting easier to predict in this day and age. This is mostly due to the development team throwing their usual tactics into the mix to warn you of the impending jump scare. Annabelle Conjuring doesn't escape this trend and much of the scares can be seen a mile away in some form or manner. While there are a few moments that were good tries, the tactics got repetitive and/or cheesy to be laughable rather than fearful. Fortunately, some creepy special effects and the darkness offset this enough to still get under your skin… thanks religion nightmare inducing series.

The Verdict:

Overall, Annabelle Creation is one of the better horror movies of the summer and perhaps this year. It is dark, creepy, and moves at that pace needed to keep you invested in the movie for the two-hour run time. In addition, the filling in gaps and hints start to connect the world (a very popular trend), which will have you die hard horror fans screaming in delight at both scares and plot. Yet, there are still elements of the story telling to clean up and utilizing your characters you bring in is a big step to improve on. In addition, I hope the next installment forgoes the predictable moves and gives us that kick I haven't seen yet. Considering everything, this reviewer recommends a visit to the theater for this one, assuming you are disturbed by spiritual haunting movies.

My scores: Horror/Mystery/Thriller: 8.5 Movie Overall: 7.0

P.S. Stay for the end of the credits for some teasing.
45 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
ruizjaime20 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
When I see a doll on the movie poster and it's suppose to be a "horror" movie......I expected the doll to move and actually be the one killing as opposed to just a demon spirit being the one doing the killing. If that's the case remove the doll and just make the movie about an evil spirit. False advertising, it's like A Fast and Furious movie putting a car on their poster and throughout the entire movie the car is only shown and not in action or moving at all. Save your money and watch Cult of Chucky to see a killer doll movie.
39 out of 70 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A spooky and faithful entry in Wan's 'Conjuring' universe
Brandon Robinson10 August 2017
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.
28 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A horror flick full of jump scares
The Jellicle Kat9 August 2017
Much like Ouija: Origin of Evil from last year, Annabelle: Creation is actually a prequel instead of a sequel. As the title implies, the movie provides the origin story of how the possessed doll that eventually ends up in the hands of The Conjuring's paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren first came to be inhabited by an evil entity.

Bottomline - Demonic doll torments little girls.
41 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
So bad.
gngaaragabriel2 September 2017
This movie is suck guys, don't spend your money with it. To abbreviate: Basically, jump-scare. Bad plot. The characters only make stupid decisions. In the middle of the movie you're practically begging for it to end. And I begging you, help us to decrease the star rate of this movie.
25 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Please don't waste your time and money.
castelboy23 August 2017
I will be plain and simple, this has to be one of the most horrible movies i have ever saw. I will make topics about what is wrong about this "movie": -The plot makes absolutely no sense. -The characters despite being children never act like a "normal" person would act on a similar situation. -On the whole "horror" movie there where only 1 gory scene and 1 jump-scare in my opinion. I can't tell more about how awful this movie is without spoiling for the poor people who will waste their time and money watching this garbage. I actually didn't dislike the Conjuring series until now. I cannot understand how this movie has 7.1 rating, it blows my mind.
40 out of 80 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
justinnathanson18 August 2017
Just AWFUL. I went to this picture a fan of horror movies and really wanting to be scared, on the edge of my seat, scream, and do all of the things one does when watching a well put together scary movie. This was not one of those. It was littered with cliche's, to an embarrassing degree. I didn't jump once. The story was weak. The writing was laughable. Was this even a horror film?I want my money back!
30 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Scary and very well done!
milosprole911 August 2017
2017 become a good year for horror. I had no high hope watching it, but it's actually surprisingly excellent movie, lots of fun and scary with amazing jump scares. Great cinematography. It's much like "Ouija: Origin of Evil" from last year which is also a prequel. This movie is very well done! 👌
33 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Conjuring franchise saves itself from itself
Kalevi Ko8 August 2017
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.
25 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Chucky got nothing on you girl. This movie works on so many levels !
jtaveras6411 August 2017
What helps this installment In the wan series is its clever suspense. As a horror movie it definitely works on so many levels. The location the acting the pacing the camera angles and offcourse the story are undoubtedly great.

If I had to rack up my top horror movies this entry is right up there with the exorcist. Another standout is the fact that in a year with lackluster horror movies it's good to be able to count on wan to deliver scares, thrills and good story telling.

As an addition to the Conjuring franchise it holds on its own while also adding to the overall background of the Conjuring. As a sequel it surpasses the origin in every level.

Chucky got nothing on you girl ! James Wan remains King in Psychological Torture. And now the most important questions remains ...when do we get the next installment?

Final Grade A+
25 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Yet Another Reminder of Just How Creepy Dolls Can Be
roblesar999 August 2017
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)
21 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
They took all of the worst things available and made a sequel out of it
martin-mac27 August 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Annabelle w had a lot of potential and I was really looking forward to it as I love the Conjouring movies. But it was a huge disappointment.

Why do we need to see everything, why don't you let room to our fantasy and only work with subtle visuals? This would give much more tension and would make it much more scarier.

But instead, here we see the "Devil" who looks like he borrowed his leather-fetish- costume from a weird porno-movie or we see a ripped body and ridiculous scenes where we see the devil-thing which looks like a gremlin who got water after 12. (The SFX didn't look better than back in the 80s. Not to speak about the urge of the makers to show me how every single finger was broken by the demon. Come on! Why can't we go back to subtle and atmospheric horror instead of trying to be as disgusting as possible?

Anyway, I had to laugh at a lot of scenes as they were just too ridiculous. It's obvious that the makers tried to fit everyone's taste instead of transforming the story's' heritage into something special. I'm more than disappointed.
10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Origin of Annabelle
Claudio Carvalho13 October 2017
The manufacturer of doll Samuel Mullins (Anthony LaPaglia) is a happy family man with his wife Esther (Miranda Otto) and their daughter Bee (Samara Lee), who dies hit by a car. Twelve years later, Samuel welcomes a group of orphan girls and a nun from a closed orphanage at home. He tells that only a closed room (that belonged to Bee) and Esther's room would be off limits for the girls. The crippled girl Janice (Talitha Bateman) sneaks in Bee's room during the night and sees a doll inside a closet. She plays in the room and soon she is haunted by an evil force. What has Janice unleashed in Bee's room?

"Annabelle: Creation" tells the story of the origin of Annabelle. The flawless screenplay is well-written; there is explanation for everything; and the viewers startle in many scenes. The girl Talitha Bateman has great performances in the roles of Janice and Annabelle. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Annabelle 2: A Criação do Mal" ("Annabelle 2: The Creation of the Evil")
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Average horror flick
carlos-glz02621 August 2017
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.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Good transitions an creepy scenes help give this movie the scary edge
mitchellzelenak14 August 2017
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.
16 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Sucks in comparison to the first.
somf4 August 2017
Said no one ever. Seriously this is a really solid horror film. I pretty much detested "Annabelle". Especially in light of the fact that it rode on the coattails of the excellent "The Conjuring". You will see a lot of comparisons to Ouija 2 when people discuss this film, which managed to pull off the same difficult feat. And they both do it as prequels to the previously awful franchises first films.

Creation takes awhile to pick up speed. And the director does something very interesting for the first half hour or so. There is barely a note of music. Silence creates all the jolts. It worked really well though I thought it was going to be odd to sustain a horror film with no music at all. Not to mention that sitting next to an IMAX theater playing Dunkirk kind of detracted from the silence thing.

As it gets into a more haunted house story and the music kicks in, the film really takes off. Lots of excellent scares. Creepy kids always help. Not to mention the fact that more than one inanimate object is depicted.

Solid horror film that proves that dishing out horror on screen takes a special group of talent, starting with a competent director. Horror is the most difficult genre to pull off. It is tough to elicit laughs for instance, but it is ten times tougher to scare someone on screen.
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The prequel to That Scary Doll in The Conjuring Series
mikenontonmulu9 August 2017
Yes, this was another one of those really scary movies. I counted there were at least 3 very scary moments during the whole movie which ran for about 109 minutes (not too short like slasher horror movie). The rest of them were not scary but just having shocking effect.

The movie was having all the usual effects of dark places in a large old house, with the occasional surprises every now and then. The sound effects were put to good use, especially the music during those scary moments in the climax, or even the silence in certain scenes.

This time David F. Sandberg (director of another good horror movie Lights Out) was able to create the creepiness of an old house, with the scary Annabelle doll and combine them with the mystery surrounding the Mullins family. It was also very very cool of him to make references to the Conjuring 2 movie, plus of course the ending scene which you could only understand if you have watched Annabelle. I think David did a fantastic job of making sure this movie was up to the standard the other movies in the Conjuring universe have set previously.

I also like the performance of the young Talitha Bateman as Janice and Lulu Wilson as Linda. Both of them did wonderful job of portraying their characters. There were also few funny moments usually involving Linda as she was the youngest and therefore was very playful. I think the stars of this movie were actually the two of them while the rest of the cast did not give too much impression to my opinion. As a supernatural horror movie, this one was worthwhile to see in the cinema to give more scary impact and of course to enjoy the dark surrounding and the good sound effects.

If you are a fan of horror movies and especially if you want to see some continuity with The Conjuring series, then this is definitely a must see movie. But if you are one of those people who do not like supernatural horror movies, then it would be best if you avoid this one. By the way, the movie had 2 post credit scenes. So you can wait and see them by waiting till the very end. The last one was better to be seen not by yourself.

For my complete review, pls have a look at
13 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews