IMDb > Annabelle: Creation (2017) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Annabelle: Creation
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Annabelle: Creation More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 201 reviews in total 

84 out of 132 people found the following review useful:

A prequel of a prequel has no business being this good. 

Author: Cameron Clay (criticadelcinema)
20 July 2017

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.

Was the above review useful to you?

69 out of 104 people found the following review useful:

Better than the first!

Author: Drank22
20 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

46 out of 62 people found the following review useful:

Why why why!?

Author: meggens from Netherlands
25 August 2017

*** This review may contain 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..

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 41 people found the following review useful:

completely nonsensical horror movie

Author: Dennis Haupt
2 September 2017

*** This review may contain 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

36 out of 46 people found the following review useful:

What a waste of time and money.

Author: Ana Silva (Anaslair) from Portugal
20 August 2017

*** This review may contain 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

44 out of 65 people found the following review useful:

How is this movie getting such good reviews? Have our standards really plummeted this much?

Author: buenoschiches from Canada
17 August 2017

*** This review may contain 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

Way overrated. I walked out

Author: Mike LeMar
16 August 2017

*** This review may contain 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 24 people found the following review useful:


Author: ruizjaime
20 August 2017

*** This review may contain 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

34 out of 60 people found the following review useful:

A horror flick full of jump scares

Author: The Jellicle Kat from San Francisco, CA
9 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

Conjuring franchise saves itself from itself

Author: Kalevi Ko from Taiwan
8 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.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 21:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Official site
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history