Ouija: Origin of Evil (2016) User Reviews

This prequel has no business being as good as it is.

[Matt_Layden · 7/10 · 3 January 2017]

This prequel has no business being as good as it is. The first Ouija film came out in 2014 and quickly faded away into obscurity. So imagine my surprise when they decide to make a 'prequel' of all things. I hunch is that The Conjuring films have been pretty successful and they are set in the 70's, when things were a little creepier, no cell phones and genuine scary aesthetic. Imagine my surprise again when up and coming horror filmmakers Mike Flanagan was the man behind the camera. The underrated mirror horror flick Oculus and deaf home invasion flick Hush were two of his recent outings. Things were looking not too bad for this flick and to top it off, it received some pretty decent reviews.

Alice and her two daughters run a scam business in which they "speak to the dead". The mother justifies this business by telling her youngest daughter, Doris, that it helps people move on and get closure. When her eldest, Lina, plays the new Ouija boardgames at a friends house, she tells her mother to incorporate it into her act. She does and things take a sinister turn when they scam becomes reality.

It's hard to make a game board scary. The first film tried, failed and this one tries and succeeds for the most part. Any non-horror fan might balk at the idea that this film is good, but I consider this movie to be one of the most underrated flicks of the year. Flanagan knows how to build solid tension and he doesn't rely on cheap scares or an obscene amount of gore. This film has none of that. Careful framework and lighting is all he needs to create an unsettling atmosphere. Whenever someone decides to look through the ouija glass piece, you feel yourself tense up expecting something to happen.

Kids in horror films are the go to for anything scary. Most movies tend to cast children horribly and they end of ruining the film. Doris, played by Lulu Wilson delivers an innocent and somewhat chilling performance as the youngest daughter. Her goodbye message to a young boy about what it feels like to be strangled to death is an excellent scene to send chills down your spine. No scary images, sounds or blood needed. Just a child delivering one monologue about suffocating you.

Obviously the film is far from perfect, but it doesn't cater to the happy ending crowd either. It takes some chances and for the most part, lands them. I was surprised by how much I liked this film, which may be why the rating is higher than what others would tend to give a film like this. Had the first film never existed, this would be a bigger hit.

Ouija: Origin of Evil (2016)

[rockman182 · 7/10 · 5 January 2017]

When I first heard about this sequel/prequel my initial thoughts were: "Who the hell asked for this?" The first Ouija was cookie cutter horror film. It use the device of a ouija board (and the mystique and eeriness of it) as a crutch for the thin, awfully written that followed. It was a completely forgettable experience, so one would wonder why the film series was brought up again. Its a good thing that first impressions are just what they are because this prequel is not bad at all.

The film was in better hands when it was announced that Mike Flanagan would be directing but I was still mixed. Oculus was actually pretty great. A creative idea that was actually pretty emotional and investing. Flanagan's followup was the Netflix film Hush. I know a lot of people loved Hush but maybe these people don't watch movies often or are lenient to what they see on Netflix. Hush was terrible. I don't want to go into it here but maybe some other time I can explain how improbably dumb it really is. Anyways, this film is a prequel of sorts to the first and is based on a family who help people move on from their passed loved ones by staging seances. A ouija board causes dark spirits in the house to possess a young girl leading to trouble and at times, some wicked fun.

The film is set in the 60s and you can immediately tell by the film style. The style is of a film you'd see from that era; they even used the old Universal Pictures logo at the start of the film. Its not just the post production editing of the film but the costume, music, and just all around aura is done very well. No one knows her well yet but Lulu Wilson made this film. She does a great job and there are a few moments (where the script was fantastic) and she was able to come off as unsettling, just from saying her lines. She is without a doubt the strongest point of the film.

The film isn't without flaws. The third act isn't exactly fantastic as some questionable things happen and you scratch your head wondering if there could have been a better resolution. There definitely could have been. Also, the CG does look ropy at times but I think that can be forgettable as the film offers decent entertainment value. Here's a film that sacrifices scares for build up, good performances, and focus on the story of why spirits have possessed Doris and the circumstances surrounding whats going on. I can respect that.

I'm usually extremely critical of horror films because these days so many films go for jump scares and have no substance. There are exceptions that are becoming smart, nostalgic, or reinventing the horror genre. I don't think there is anything innovative about Ouija: Origin of Evil but its a massive improvement over its predecessor and is a film has a good amount going for it to make for a good time.

7/10

shockingly pretty good

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 21 November 2017]

It's 1967 Los Angeles. Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) runs a crooked spiritual reading business out of her home. She uses her daughters Lina (Annalise Basso) and younger Doris (Lulu Wilson) in operating her scams. They incorporate an Ouija board into their production. While trying to contact the girls' dead father, Doris seems to make real contact. Father Tom (Henry Thomas) is the headmaster of the girls' school. Mikey (Parker Mack) has a crush on Lina.

Surprise! This is actually good. It is well-made. The characters are well-drawn and well-acted. I wouldn't say that this is breaking down any new walls but there is good in doing good work. I do have a couple of small nitpicks. For some reason, Alice and Father Tom go out for what looks like a fancy dinner. It almost looks like a date if it weren't for the characters. Second, I would keep the possibility that Doris is scamming everyone until further into the movie. It would be nice to have Father Tom uncover the whole situation as a reveal. The good are the actors, the mood, the simple premise, and good construction. It's a shocker that this is all pretty good.

Better Than The First

[benjaminryder-45940 · 6/10 · 16 July 2019]

It's rare to find a sequel that surpasses the first these days, but Ouija: Origin of Evil manages to just that. Not that it was a very tough feat considering the original was one of the most lame-brained movies I've seen in a while, but Origin of Evil improves upon its predecessor tenfold - just not enough to make it really worthwhile.

It's obvious that Mike Flannigan is on his way to becoming one of our true masters of horror, but this film seems more like a paycheck movie for him and it shows. He does the best he can with the tepid material, but ends up using the old "distorted faces/mouths with rolled back eyes" effect a few too many times and it quickly becomes tedious.

Like all of Flannigan's films, it's wonderfully well cast and beautifully put together. I just wish they'd spent a little bit more time with the script. You might be better off watching Flannigan's Hush, Absentia, Gerald's Game, Occulus, or The Haunting of Hill House.

Deft Direction and Stellar Acting Carries the Movie

[Jared_Andrews · 7/10 · 28 October 2019]

If you first "Ouija" film, you might have been inclined to skip this addition (a prequel) to the series. No one would blame you. "Ouija" is a laughably awful film. "Ouija: Origin of Evil" however, is a surprisingly competent and thoroughly enjoyable horror movie.

Perhaps it should not come as a surprise that "O of E" turned out so well. With the steady guidance of director Mike Flanagan (Hush, Oculus, Haunting of Hill House), one of the most consistent creators of scary stories in the business, we should expect high quality work. Once again, he delivers.

The story revolves around a recently widowed mother and her two daughters. At risk of losing their old, creepy and possibly haunted (definitely haunted) house, the mother resorts to work as a fake medium to make money, calling on her daughters to contribute to the ruse. Things get more exciting when the mother brings home a Ouija board, not knowing that sinister spirits would soon possess her younger daughter.

Then, as we witness the little girl's behavior grow increasingly strange, our goosebumps grow increasingly prevalent (because creepy little girls are a reliably freaky scary movie trope). The older sister soon suspects something, the little girl crawls on walls, and a priest shows up to help. That stuff is predictable and somewhat unoriginal. But this movie still works because of its splendid acting - the little girl, Doris (Lulu Wilson), is particularly impressive - and deft direction.

Mike Flanagan clearly knows how to run the show. He makes sure that "O of E" becomes a far cry from other horror movies of this ilk, which possess so little inventiveness in their direction.

With this film, we are treated to elegant camera movement, unnerving closeups, and evocative framing and angle choices that all appear purposeful and thought through. Instead of calling attention to an evil presence on screen with a hard cut, we simply see a shadowy figure crouching on the edge of the frame.

Flanagan also chooses to include limited jump scares and, mercifully, no fake jump scares. Fake jump scares are what I call those moments of building tension when the sound goes silent, then suddenly there's a blast of jarring noise that makes us jump out of our seats as the camera reveals a harmless friend character. It's a cheap manipulation, a dirty trick. We deserve better, and Flanagan gives us better.

Rather than turning to a loud and bombastic score to sell scares, Flanagan relies on the editing and our natural inclinations as viewers to feel scared. He trusts that when something scary that unexpectedly appears in front of us on screen, it will deliver chills.

"O of E" delivers a slow-building eerie viewing experience. There are no excessive bursts of violence. Nothing is over-the-top. It's a small-scale movie, but one that is nonetheless effective. I recommend it to any fans of possession movies, especially if you prefer ones devoid of gore.

So this is where it all began!

[Reno-Rangan · 6/10 · 24 July 2017]

It is a decent horror film, but surely better than the first. The previous part was an usual teen themed horror where everything started as a playful. But this one was a prequel and it focused on the origins. A single mother with two daughters is making money helping the people who want to contact their beloved dead ones. The things changes when her little daughter started to communicate the spirits of her own. The chaos unleashes, the house becomes haunted and the family begins to fall apart.

Keeping it simple is what worked out well for the film, despite thematically borrowed from others, scenes were kind of familiar and characters intentionally developed. Particularly the priest role was the most overused in any horror film. Followed by the twist. That turning point was good, but not a new. Nice performances and well shot film. Ouija is a fine concept for a horror theme and with this film's somewhat success, I hope the next one would only get better. So it is worth a watch, if you're not anticipating a something special.

6/10

Spelling a disaster

[Prismark10 · 6/10 · 2 September 2017]

Ouija: Origin of Evil is a prequel set in in 1967 and is filmed very much like a period piece from that era. The film begins with an old Universal pictures logo.

Widow Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) stages scam seances with her teenage daughter Paulina (Annalise Basso) from her house. They justify it by helping their clients to move on.

When they purchase a Ouija board as a gimmick for the act, the youngest daughter Doris (Lulu Wilson) seems to have become possessed by a mysterious force and behaves like a genuine medium. Doris thinks she can contact her father and starts acting creepily even showing strange abilities such as mind control.

Local priest Father Tom (Henry Thomas) investigates Doris's abilities as a medium and thinks there is a link to a sinister Nazi doctor.

The film delivers thrills and some scares without going too over the top. The acting is good from the younger cast members. You get the sense of genuine dread but then lapses into silliness and predictability at the end.

Good Concept, but predictable and below average

[BauersApprentice · 4/10 · 16 January 2017]

I'll keep it simple, the curiosity around a Ouija board creates an interesting concept for a movie, however beyond the first 40 minutes the film becomes predictable and disappointing. There are some gaping holes in the storyline and the acting isn't fantastic, especially when the boyfriend drops down hung from bedsheets out of nowhere and the reaction from all present is as if to carry on as if nothing happened. Goes for the snappy 'fright' loud noise moments all too often without delivering on a progressive storyline, could've been a lot better but if you're looking for something along the lines of insidious or the conjuring expect a lot of disappointment

Better Than It Has Any Right To Be, But Still...

[spencergrande6 · 6/10 · 12 December 2016]

Mike Flanagan just gets so close yet again, yet falls disappointingly short. Oculus is still his best work, and the promise that both Hush and this prequel to a PG-13 board game prequel show, is that if given the right opportunity he might really be capable of a cold-blooded classic.

This is a film that shouldn't exist, should never have gotten theatrical distribution and definitely shouldn't have attracted the likes of Flanagan (okay, he probably did this to increase his clout in the industry, but still). He musters some great work here, following familiar supernatural clichés but bringing his own touch to the proceedings.

The setting is beautiful, the characters likable and not completely square. The atmosphere is given time to build, he luxuriates in teasing and messing with audience expectations (as a way of spiting this, and goosing the audience lulled into a slow burn placation, he includes an explosive scene wherein the actual demon is seen shoving his fist down the little girl's throat. It's both too much and a necessary jolt at the time, a conundrum if ever there was one and a small encapsulation of everything right and wrong within this film).

It's too bad some of the nice work done in the first 2/3rds of the film is undone by a clichéd, boring, exorcism-lite finale. None of it is very scary, and it all has the feel of fitting into the "Ouija" franchise package, whatever in God's name that could mean. Considering the stakes here, what Flanagan does is still impressive.

Ouija- Origin of a lazy copy

[HenbaineAccount2 · 4/10 · 11 April 2017]

Sorry but I honestly do not understand the 10/10 reviews for this movie. In fact I think my 4 is begin a tad over generous. Let me explain why..

I'll begin with the good bits.. 1. the score is pretty nice, ambient but eery and a bit sad.

2. Some of the effects are pretty creepy, especially where the possession starts to fully show. 3. There is some good suspense to be had a few nail bite moments especially as it all gets a bit crazy toward the end with a possession free for all going on. 4. The young lady playing Doris shines in this movie, very talented despite being given a painfully clichéd creepy child role, she is superb. 5. The ending was a surprise, but that's probably as I haven't bothered watching "Ouija" due to very bad reviews. 5. The actress playing Lina has her moments also as a promising actress. 6 Character dynamics and interactions have some genuinely believable moments.

The not so good bits..

1. This type of story is beyond exhausted. They try to twist it with the whole " we can make our readings more - real with this board" but it's not enough 2. dead parent, creepy kid, bitchy rebellious teen kid, dead parent and strong but unravel parent. 3. A creepy new fad appears and things go all eery. People get possessed, people get killed and then more people get killed- no real reason as to why these spirits are killing a whole family. 4. No real closure as to what the "other" things with Markus are 5. The families general reaction to hanging teenager in their stairway & their dead kid/sibling is way too nonplused. I mean you kill your sister happily then come round not giving a hoot.. but freak out only when you kill your mother. 6. Given that the dynamics and interactions have such believable moments , the chronic underacting near the end just makes me frustrated. 7. The mother is seriously irritating throughout.And exploiting your child, top parenting, how does no one step in knowing her kid is skipping school to "work" with her? 8. Dialogue begins to drift into cliché territory near the end as do all the effects, it's just like watching a rip of the Exorcist mixed with other known themes... 9. The end just appears so suddenly. I hate it when movies begin to show promise then just race to an ending. It just escalates un naturally fast for my liking, I mean really the kid does what like 2 readings, writes loads of junk in polish then mass murders and possesses people in a couple of days if that? 10. Daddy sews up doll mouths to stop "the voices" was he alive/dead when he did this? and why so suddenly, I mean if these things have been in the house so long, the mother and her kids do "readings" all the time why suddenly does it take this kid turning out to be some insane conduit medium out of nowhere? Surely she'd have shown signs sooner? surely they would have had weird things happen sooner?

Too many plot holes in this movie which is a shame as it does have promise but the lazy approach tarnishes it's ideal.

"Ouija: Origin of Evil"- Everything the lame-brained and poorly made original was not. Atmospheric, well-paced and lovingly crafted with taste and thoughtfulness.

[TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness · 8/10 · 3 November 2016]

Perhaps the most shocking and surprising treat of the 2016 Halloween season is director Mike Flanagan's prequel tale "Ouija: Origin of Evil"- a skillfully crafted, tasteful and highly atmospheric follow- up to the disastrously bad 2014 thriller "Ouija." It's frankly stunning just how good a film Flanagan was able to build from such a poor foundation, weaving a tale that honestly not only runs laps around it's far inferior predecessor... but honestly made me completely forget about what came before. In my mind, "Ouija" will be a forgotten victim of studio greed, while this prequel will stand tall as the "true" film based on the iconic and controversial board-game of terror.

In the 1960's, widow Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) works as a fortune teller out of her home, staging false séances with the help of her teenage daughter Paulina (Annalise Basso) and younger child Doris. (Lulu Wilson) After purchasing a Ouija board as a new gimmick for her work, Alice does not notice that Doris has become overtaken by a deranged and mysterious force associated with the board, instead believing that her young daughter's newfound abilities and knowledge of things she could not possibly know are signs that unlike her, Doris is a real medium. However, as Doris' abilities become gradually all the more powerful and sinister, Alice and Paulina must band together to try and break her free from the devious spirits of the past that have taken ahold of her physical form...

Flanagan directs from a script co-written by Jeff Howard, and much like his wonderful previous efforts "Oculus" and "Hush", here he continues to shine as one of the finest new voices in horror. There's a certain sense of taste and thoughtfulness he injects into his work, as he takes his time to try and establish strong character and interpersonal relationships, in addition to identifiable human drama which helps to accentuate the fear that builds. He also just knows how to deliver a darned good scare- a skill he uses expertly throughout the entire runtime here to build a great sense of foreboding dread.

The performances are all stellar as well, helping to add to the film's high quality and impact. Elizabeth Reaser is fantastic as the mother Alice, and you really get a feel for a person lost after the death of their beloved spouse who is trying to hold it together for the sake of her children. Wilson is a great new Doris and does remarkably well for an actress of such a young age. Supporting roles by the likes of Henry Thomas are all uniformly strong and help to round out the cast in likable performances. And Annalise Basso steals the show as Paulina (also known as "Lina"), who becomes our main focus and is a strong presence on-screen. At only 17 years old, Basso is definitely one to keep an eye on in the future. She possesses talent far beyond her years, and is the beating heart of the film as a sister and daughter struggling to help her sibling and mother from the forces at play- both supernatural and emotional.

The film does falter at times a bit, which is where it loses points. Despite the first film being decidedly very poor by comparison, this film does a bit of distracting ret-con work that may bother those who are familiar with the original. Some major details of the backstory and rules are changed, which made it feel a bit inorganic as a continuation. It's also a bit too heavy on the scares up- front, which lessened their impact. I would have preferred more slow a buildup. And it does lack some drama since this is a prequel and you'll be able to guess some of what happens based on this fact.

Still, that cannot stop this from being a darned good and very well- assembled supernatural horror. It's not one of the best horror films ever made by any means, but it's a solid and highly entertaining thriller boasting some heart, some good scares and a great cast. This is the movie you've been waiting for if you've wanted to see a movie based around the idea of the dreaded Ouija board. My advice? Skip out on the first film and just watch this as a stand-alone. It's far more rewarding an experience than the awful original could ever hope to be.

I give "Ouija: Origin of Evil" a strong 8 out of 10. If you're open minded, be sure to give it a shot, especially if the last one let you down. Take it from me... this is a very pleasant surprise.

Pretty Creepy & Scary

[larrys3 · 7/10 · 21 February 2017]

I am by no means a hard core horror film buff, but I do view them from time to time. I found this one to be quite the creepy little horror flick, and it gets increasingly scary as it progresses.

As I've often noted, I have to overlook some of the really dumb decisions made by characters in horror movies, and this one is no exception. Also, the plot elements here are similar to many I've seen in this genre. However, I felt it was quite well presented with good acting from all the cast, well directed by Mike Flanagan, and solidly written by Flanagan and Jeff Howard.

Overall, this film rather creeped me out and I'm still thinking about that scary ending.

Appalling... in the worst way.

[wimpel · 1/10 · 21 December 2016]

First of all, let me state that I do not consider myself a hardcore horror connaisseur, but I do like to think that I can spot a pile of sh*te when I see one. And boy is this movie a massive sh*tepile!

Also, I don't ever do reviews. But I feel like have to step in here.

I saw HUSH, it was okay... I saw OCULUS, it was bad... But this one... man oh man... The real horror about this movie is that it manages to score 6.2 on here and even get some good reviews.

It is obvious that Mike Flanagan has seen all the James Wan horror flicks. It is also obvious that Mr. Flanagan does not understand what makes these movies good.

To make things easy, let's start with the good: - The oldest daughter (Annalise Basso) was pretty convincing (up until the end) - Her boyfriend (Parker Mack) looked like a young Patrick Wilson and wasn't horrible nor important. - ... Nope, that's about it.

Other characters: - The mom was bland and boring. Also, more than once the camera stayed on her for too long for her to stay in character - The priest was okay but unnecessary - The youngest daughter wasn't good, but hey, she's young. Even worse was her CGI mouth, though. Flanagan must've thought this looked amazing because we only saw like seven random jump scares with the girl's CGI mouth open wide... - Ghost daddy... why?? what?!

The writing is horrible as there are far too many dialogues in which the characters lay out their entire backstory in the most uninteresting way e.g. we don't need to know that the girls' grandmother was a fortune teller.

The pacing was incredibly slow. There's one scene in which the girls are alone in the house, which could have been a tense sequence. Instead we see some teenage couple shenanigans and a really tiresome dinner date of two widowed adults. The only purpose being that we know the priest lost his wife and we can move on to the seance scene...

Almost every moment of this movie felt like I'd seen it somewhere before only slightly/a lot better: - The 60s feel from "The Conjuring" - The medium hoax setup - The black monsters from "Insidious" - The gaping CGI mouth from 100 movies - The pupil-less eyeballs - The slingshot scene - The lips sewn together - The jump scare cliffhanger before the credits - The girl saying "it seems really dumb to split up" - The fact that they do split up even after the girl said the previous... Almost all of it is a badly rip off from another (or 10 different) movie(s).

ALMOST! The one thing that was a first for me was the "plot". If I understand correctly, the family is being terrorized and eventually killed off by an angry mob of Polish Jew ghosts? The priest explains that the ghost possessing the little girl was (a) rescued from a concentration camp by allied soldiers (b) brought back to America only to (c) be kidnapped buy some crazy Nazi doctor who experiments on Jews in a basement in an American suburb... These experiments primarily being your typical torture stuff(?) like sewing mouths shut, cutting vocal cords, cutting in general...

Oh and then the priest drops something along the lines of "but there was something else in the darkness, something that had never been human to begin with"... So demons? Do you mean demons, priests? Can you tell us more about those inhuman fiends please?! No? Oh... you want to keep the focus on the Polish Jew ghosts? Oh, OK... So don't torture Jews or they will possess innocent kids and slaughter families? That's not a weird moral at all...

So... don't spend money on this. Please don't. I haven't seen the other Ouija movies... but if this is the best one as stated by a reviewer before me, I will stay as far away from them as possible.

Hello Friend

[nogodnomasters · 7/10 · 6 September 2017]

The film takes place in 1967 Los Angeles (IMDB claims 1965) where Alice (Elizabeth Reaser) performs scam seances for money, something she has been doing since her husband Roger died. (Michael Weaver) She allows her two Catholic school daughters to help her. Then enter a Ouija board, possession, Tubular Bells style music, a priest, and a little girl with an odd voice... very formula up until the ending which they just scrambled around until no one was happy with it.

In spite of the formula writing, the actors did a good job to raise the level of a less than stellar script, especially young Lulu Wilson who has a flair for horror. She will be in "Annabella 2." Guide: No swearing, sex, or nudity.

A lot better than it has any right to be

[anthonyvr-60079 · 6/10 · 2 November 2020]

A somewhat cliche but well constructed horror with genuinely frightening scenes.

Worth watching for the creepy moments

[korythacher · 6/10 · 8 October 2022]

Bottom line: I think this was worth the watch, but I was torn between 5-6/10. It's a pretty decent supernatural horror with some surprisingly creepy moments for PG-13.

It's got a good atmosphere, some mystery, and a good creep factor.

They did a *really* good job with the creepy faces on the various supernatural encounters and that made me really glad I watched it. If you're into creepy stuff, you'll probably enjoy that too once it gets going.

The acting and characters felt pretty bland, which held the score back, but it was still enjoyable. I probably would have given it a 7-8 if they did a better job with that.

atmospheric horror that deserved a better-written ending

[Echo9-71 · 6/10 · 21 January 2022]

This is an solid, slow-burn, atmospheric horror movie; well-paced capped off with a thrilling third act. It very effectively combines a simple plot, and natural characterization, with good acting and direction. The result is a compelling story that is believeable and susupenseful.

At the end of the final act, I was thinking "high-fives all-around, good job guys" and was about to give this two thumbs up.

And then, inexplicably, in the last 5 minutes the filmmakers revert to cheesy B-horror cliches making for a jarring denoument that simply feels wrong.

WTF? Was that studio exec interference or just plain bad judgement? Nope. Because it's a prequel (to a movie I haven't seen yet), I guess it had to end with a bridge to the other movie. But it could have and should have been better, so the truth is, it's just bad writing. The last few minutes just don't match the tone or narrative arc of the first hour and a half, and it comes across feeling like a cheap add-on. Not a twist ("cool!"), or a surprise ("gotcha!") just lame ("seriously? Pffthtttt!") (That's the raspberry sound, BTW.)

This movie should have wrapped up nicely at 1:27:25. If it had: 8/10.

With the dopey last 4 and a half minutes added: 6/10.

PS - If you can, stop watching at 1:27:25 and just imagine a better CODA; e.g., Lana, the sensible one, getting on with her life as best she can, and the Ouija board washing up on some beach like in Jumanji.

New-age ghost movies don't do it for me

[xundeadgirlx · 3/10 · 1 November 2016]

Am i the only one who finds newer "horror" releases to be completely predictable, boring, and the effects unimpressive? We're living in an era where Paranormal Activity(don't get me started) made enough money to make numerous sequels...I've tried seeing some recent films like Mama (okay), The Babadook (decent til the end), Lights Out (actually was decent), and now this, and CGI just makes things NOT scary. Was the film itself nicely done? Yes. I liked the cast, the acting wasn't bad;they actually looked like "real people." But the cliché where the little girl happens to know more than everyone else about the evil spirit, she becomes possessed and it becomes like every other attempt at an exorcism film. Not only are we supposed to fear a child, we are supposed to fear a child that has a liquid-like face that stretches and CGI whited out eyes, she runs along walls (last ten minutes) and says...stuff in other people's voices? I just don't get how this can pass as good. 3/10

Nice horror, with some good tricks

[cristiananton-70070 · 6/10 · 8 December 2021]

A nice horror movie, good as a tasty snack before lunch. Enjoyble for fun with friends, with some interesting scary tricks. It let me the impression that was made for purpouse to seem light, unpretentious, but still decent horror movie.

Really bad movie

[olli-vihma · 1/10 · 29 October 2019]

Im a fan of horror movies. This flic though was a real waste of time. Bad acting which only got worse along the way. If someone tried to make Exorcist fan movie with no skills and made the story up while filming, this could be the result. Reminded me of some Ed Wood movies in a bad way. Do not waste your time would be my advice. If it only was even worse, it could be at least interesting.

A pretty captivating little horror flick, and beautifully shot

[randymcbeast · 8/10 · 8 January 2017]

I wasn't really expecting much from this one. The IBDb rating was pretty low, the title is a bit cheesy, and the writers, directors and cast are not exactly A-listers. None of that mattered though as this one was actually pretty good.

First off, the scenes were beautiful. It was like watching a warm sunset. In addition, the direction and camera angles really enhanced the suspense and intensity. The special effects were also top notch and at one point I was like, "Whaaaat? That is cool".

I was pretty captivated throughout, although it did have it's clunky moments but not too many of them and they quickly worked their way out of them.

The cast did a superb job with the young Lulu Wilson pretty much stealing the show. I'll most likely be seeing her again in my nightmares. Annalise Basso, Elizabeth Reaser and Henry Thomas also did an excellent job so I don't want to sell them short either.

Overall this was a pleasant surprise with moments of nail-biting suspense. Definitely worth the watch on a dark and quiet night. Oh, and one other reviewer mentioned not watching the preview. I didn't so that might have helped.

One of Flanagan's stronger works

[meredithkemble · 7/10 · 22 October 2016]

Flanagan's films tend to be hit or miss, so I went into the theater not knowing exactly what to expect. I was pleasantly surprised to find that this movie was one of Flanagan's better pieces along with Oculus and Hush.

The film itself was a pretty masterful period piece, with excellent costumes and sets and lines that helped you place the time period without a big date sprawling across the screen at the opening. Seriously, the costumes were so good. Although some of the lines hit you over the head with the whole "we are in the '60s" deal, it wasn't cheesy or over-the-top.

The child acting was pretty good, particularly from Annalise Basso who I was excited to see again after her performance in Oculus. LuLu Wilson was also exceedingly creepy in plenty of parts. I was very pleased with the amount of creep factor, especially from a PG-13 movie which usually rely on cheap scares (example: this movie's predecessor).

Where this movie fell flat for me was the actual demon/ghoul/monster story. I wish they would have kept the ghoul as a fleeting figure instead of full-on showing them fairly early on in the movie. It's so much scarier to let your imagination go wild instead of seeing a digitized monster. Maybe it will be scary for the teens who go to see this film, but it took the scare factor down a notch for me. The origin story for the demon seemed a little forced and rushed towards the end, and I think choosing a less complicated origin might have made the movie run a little smoother. However, the ending was pretty good and it was an overall thrilling theater experience.

This movie does a better job of connecting its story to the previous film that it does of connecting events within its own story.

[dave-mcclain · 2/10 · 22 October 2016]

Ouija boards developed from practices that are nearly 1,000 years old and have been controversial almost from the very beginning. The modern version of the boards, which supposedly allow users to communicate with the spirits of the deceased, developed out of the centuries-old Chinese usage of an automatic writing method. The hole in the moveable planchette device was eventually widened and the writing implement was replaced by a small piece of glass through which users could see letters and words on a flat board, thus receiving messages from the spirit world. This "Ouija board" (the name probably coming from combining the French and German words for "yes") was patented in the U.S. in 1890. It has survived in the same basic form up to the present, but has been criticized - by scientists who claim that the users are the ones actually moving the planchette (whether deliberately or unconsciously) - and by Christian groups who believe that the boards could lead to demonic possession. This fear, coupled with the game's origins, became the force behind a dozen or so horror movies since the 1980s. 2016's "Ouija: Origin of Evil" (PG-13, 1:39) is a prequel to the "Ouija" horror film released in 2014.

This film portrays the origin story of the evil in that house featured in the first film, much as it was related in "Ouija". "Ouija: Origin of Evil", takes place in the mid-1960s and focuses on the three female characters at the center of the 2014 film's mythology. Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) is a widowed mother of a teenager named Paulina (Annalise Brasso), or Lina, as her family calls her, and a little girl named Doris (Lulu Wilson). Alice tries to support her small family by conducting séances for grieving people desperate to speak to their deceased loved ones. Alice has a few tricks up her sleeve to help her unsuspecting clients believe that the information she gives them is for real and that their dead relatives are really blowing out candles in response to specific questions. Alice's girls are in hiding, making the tricks work. Lina accepts that it's just a scam, but Doris doesn't really understand everything they're doing, so Alice explains that they're helping people by comforting them and giving them needed closure.

After attending a party during which her friends played with a Ouija board, Lina convinces her mother to add one to the act. As Alice is working out how to manipulate the board's planchette for her "readings", she accidentally summons a spirit which begins possessing young Doris. As the spirit seems to come and go, Doris starts acting more and more strangely – doing her homework in ways that are beyond her capability, frighteningly dealing with a schoolyard bully, channeling voices, learning the hidden secrets of their old house and, just maybe, talking to the spirit of her dead dad. Of course, Alice is worried about her daughter, but comes to believe that Doris is a legitimate medium, like Alice's mother was – and Alice wants to talk to her deceased husband too. Unfortunately for everyone involved, this is a dangerous game that Alice is playing. Caught in the middle of all this is Lina's boyfriend, Mikey (Peter Mack), and the principal at Doris' Catholic School, Father Tom (Henry Thomas), who helps Alice figure out what's happening and why, what's real and what's not, and what to do about it, risking his own life to do so.

"Ouija: Origin of Evil" does a good job of connecting its story to the original movie… but that's part of the problem. You won't necessarily be lost if you haven't seen 2014's "Ouija", but you won't fully appreciate what's going on either (especially in the very short post-credits scene, which you should just skip if you haven't seen the first film). Apart from the connections between the films, the connections between events in this film are not well established by Mike Flanagan's and Jeff Howard's script, and Howard's direction fails to build any real sense of dread – or much concern for the characters. Also not helping matters is the acting, which is pretty shaky, except for during the film's climax. Unfortunately, that resolution feels even more random and disjointed than the developments leading up to it. Many people seem to feel that this film is an improvement on the original, but that's not saying very much. Actually, knowing that these films are produced by Hasbro Studios, which is owned by Hasbro Inc., the company which currently produces the official Ouija boards, tells you all that you really need to know. If you have a Ouija board, ask it whether you should go to see this movie. If the planchette moves and hovers over the word "NO"… well… there might be something to those boards after all. "C-"

For the most part, this was a pretty decent entry with mystery , suspense and creepy events

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 23 August 2021]

Decent supernatural chiller about the mysterious Ouija ,it's called an Ouija Board, and it's been used for thousands for years to communicate with the souls of the after-world. It is set in 1967 Los Angeles, a widowed mummy named Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) works out of her suburban home as a spiritual medium , accompanied by her two daughters (Annalise Basso, Lulu Wilson) but a new stunt to bolster their seance scam business by inviting an evil presence into their home, not realizing how dangerous it is . The family is still reeling over the recent death of Roger, Alice's husband and the childrens' father. They unwittingly summon an evil entity with plans of its own who makes the house part of its sinister game. The daughters plagued by nightmares, and begin confronting their most terrifying fears when they awaken the dark powers of an ancient spirit board . Along the way , School Principal Father Tom (Henry Thomas) attempts to solve the weird events and help them , but then things go wrong . When you talk to the other side, you never know who will be listening. No telling what you'll see. It was never just a game. Some call it a spirit board. It has existed for centuries. It is used to communicate with the other side. House always wins. The game just got bigger.

This is a surprisingly competent horror movie, and it is certainly better than most other films of the same genre concerning the diabolic game , the mysterious Ouija . Enjoyable horror movie with thrills , chills and strange events , while the roles scream and panic her way through most of their scenes, . One of the film's strongest points is the fact that there's quite a lot of fun to be had with the supernatural aspects of the storyline. This starts off at the very beginning at a reunion occurs mysterious happenings , as the camera lurks suspensenful behind it's actors and beside them and above them and everywhere else. A straight-up horror movie, with its jump-scares and characters who can't see the obvious dangers that beset them . Although it packs some flaws , it still manages to be fairly entertaining. A fun, nostalgic 2000's Ouija classic , resulting to be a smashing good time. The plot is predictable and there are no big twists from what I have seen. Still the atmosphere is built up slowly and there are not many over the top scenes or special effects to distract from the plot . I am not so satisfied with the ending though. It seems too abrupt and was disappointing a little bit. The motion picture was well directed by Mike Flanagan . Mike frequent uses flashbacks to characters' traumatic events, usually involving the supernaturally-assisted death of at least one parent . Terror expert Flanagan turned to the horror genre for the first time with "Oculus", an applauded short film that is just the beginning of an ambitious horror anthology, which eventually became the inspiration for his 2013 feature film of the same name. In 2010, after raising funds on Kickstarter, he wrote and directed the applauded indie horror film "Absentia," which he credits with establishing his career. "Absentia," shot for 70k in Flanagan's apartment, led to "Oculus" (2014) and "Before I Wake" (2015). Flanagan's critically acclaimed "Hush" (2016) was released exclusively on Netflix, which led to the online streaming service producing Flanagan's adaptation of Stephen King's "Gerald's Game" (2017). Ouija : Origin of evil rating : 6/10 . Overall just decent supernatural effort.

This one belongs to ¨Ouija¨ sub-genre , other films in similar style are the following ones : ¨Ouija House¨ (2018) with Mischa Barton , Tara Reid , Dee Wallace , Chris Mulkey. ¨Ouija 3: The Charlie Charlie Challenge¨ 2016 with Amanda Knapi , Vineyard , Tom Zembrod , Todd Jenkins . ¨Ouija 2014¨ with Olivia Cooke , Ana Coto , Bianca Santos , Douglas Smith , ¨Witchboard¨ 1986 with Todd Allen, Tawny Kitaen , Stephen Nichols , Kathleen Wilhoite.

Slow-burning, character-driven, if conceptually-questionable horror with a colourful 1960s style but some ropy visual effects.

[Pjtaylor-96-138044 · 6/10 · 25 February 2018]

'Ouija: Origin Of Evil (2016)' takes almost an hour for the various elements to come together into something that starts to seem scary, with the sinister stuff sticking to the periphery until an exposition scene that marks the start of the scare-filled final act, and the ending seems to rush itself along to a predetermined conclusion in a way which suggests the filmmakers weren't quite sure where their narrative was heading until they decided they had to tie it in to the first instalment (which I haven't seen due to its reputation as one of the worst horror films of recent years) in a meaningful way. Still, this is a visually interesting and character-driven horror feature that is well-directed and doesn't rely on jump-scares to entertain its audience. It is styled to look like a film from the 1960s, complete with the old universal logo and intermittent cue marks, so it stands out from the crowd with a colourful texture not often seen in today's colour-corrected world, though some of the visual effects end up looking a little bit ropy at times perhaps more so because they stand out from the otherwise analogue aesthetic. There's still the niggling sense that the concept isn't entirely sound, though, considering it is based upon a Hasbro-owned board-game that shows up and somehow coincidentally causes the spirits, which have supposedly been in the house for a long time before the board, to start to show themselves. 6/10