Storm Reid

Review of “The Nun II”

There are two topics of discussion guaranteed to destroy the mood of any gathering: Politics and religion. It’s best to keep conversations on mundane topics like the weather, your/their work and how the local sports teams are doing (unless they are losing, then that should be avoided). In our increasingly divided society, politics is best left to the pundits on TV and religion should be kept within each of our hearts. We should live by the principles of our chosen faith but keep the proselytizing away from family and social gatherings. Maybe you can ask if anyone has seen a ghost or believes spirits haunt places. According to a survey published by the website Statista taken in 2021, 36% of Americans believe in ghosts. According to USA Today, also from 2021, 43% of Americans believe in demons. It’s likely in a gathering of 10 or more people, you’ll find three or four that believe and may have an experience to share. An entire movie universe has been spun out of our fascination with the afterlife. The ninth film in “The Conjuring” franchise is “The Nun II.”

Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga), following her battle against the Demon Nun (Bonnie Aarons) at Saint Carta’s monastery, is living at a convent in Italy. Meanwhile in France, a priest is lifted off the ground and burst into flames in front of altar boy Jacques (Maxime Elias-Menet). After the priest’s death, a lone figure is seen walking away from the church, casting the shadow of the Demon Nun. At a boarding school in France, Maurice (Jonas Bloquet), who was also working at Saint Carta, is now the handyman. He is very close with several of the girls (but not in a creepy way) especially Sophie (Katelyn Rose Downey) and her mother Kate (Anna Popplewell) who teaches at the school. The death of the priest in France is just the latest in a series of unusual deaths of priests and nuns that bear a resemblance to the death of all the nuns at Saint Cartha. A Vatican representative travels to Irene’s convent and asks her to investigate. Joining her uninvited on the journey is novitiate Sister Debra (Storm Reid) who is questioning her faith and if she’s in the right place. Irene and Debra learn the Demon Nun is looking for an ancient relic that is hidden in a former convent that is now a boarding school in France. The nuns race against time to find the relic that would give the Demon Nun enormous power.

Three “Conjuring” films, three “Annabelle” films, one “La Llorona” film and now two “The Nun” films. Some audience members and critics complain there are no original ideas coming out of Hollywood. There are (“Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” are two good examples), but films based on established intellectual properties (also known as IP) tend to be an easier thing to sell to moviegoers. There are exceptions, like the recent “Flash” film that will cost its studio Discovery/Warner Bros. hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. “Blue Beetle” likely is also going to lose money. Even the Marvel/Disney juggernaut has lately been coming up short in box office receipts. But “The Conjuring” franchise is the closest thing to a guaranteed profit in all of entertainment. Over the previous eight films, their total budgets are $178.5 million. Their total worldwide box office is $2.1 billion. We don’t have a production budget for “The Nun II” but the first “The Nun” cost $22 million so let’s estimate the cost of the sequel is $30 million. From opening day and Thursday previews, the film has grossed $13.1 million and is projected to earn north of $30 million in its opening weekend. With a franchise where each film earns on average five and a half times its production budget worldwide, plus DVD sales, VOD sales and rentals and the sale of rights to streaming platforms, it’s little wonder this franchise has continued to spit out film after film. While the bean counters in Hollywood corporate suites will find “The Nun II” to be a winner, what about audiences?

There’s a thing called the law of diminishing returns and “The Conjuring” franchise, and specifically “The Nun II,” has broken that law. I love a good horror movie. Any film that can raise my pulse, cause me to grip the armrest of my seat, give me a good jump scare and leave me exhausted as the credits roll is a winner to me. I find both “The Nun II” and its predecessor to be dull. While the sequel is an improvement, the back story of the demon, named Valak thanks to “The Conjuring 2,” isn’t compelling enough to provide the audience with a reason to care. And her desire for the relic isn’t explained either. Valak seems to be plenty powerful without it, presenting itself in one form then another and able to control its human host with ease.

Taissa Farmiga is very good at giving a look of wide-eyed fear, but the script by Ian Goldberg, Richard Naing and Akela Cooper gives her otherwise very little to do. Storm Reid is likewise wasted in an underwritten role as the young nun questioning her faith. That story thread is ignored after being mentioned when we first meet her. Perhaps the most fleshed out character is Maurice, played by Jonas Bloquet. He has a budding romantic interest in Anna Popplewell’s Kate, the mother of Katelyn Rose Downey’s Sophie. His interactions with most of the other girls at the school are playful and friendly without drifting into groomer territory. He also is willing to protect Sophie from the girls that bully her. Bloquet is more the star of “The Nun II” simply because his character is far more interesting than the demon-fighting nuns.

Valak should be a fantastic scary monster, but she is at most just a weird looking nun. With a stark, white face, glowing eyes and a mouthful of sharp teeth, Valak has all the tools to be the stuff of nightmares. Sadly, the script also lets her down as it never establishes her power set. In the opening scene she levitates a priest off the ground and sets him ablaze. Later, she grabs Irene by the throat but there’s no fire, no throwing her from wall to wall, nothing indicating Valak is any more powerful than a strong man. Why could she set the priest on fire but not Irene? Is Irene more holy or more blessed than the priest? Since Irene defeated Valak in the first film one would think the demon would have more reason to kill her than some average priest (a reason is given why the people she’s killing are her targets but that gets into spoilers). The screenwriters don’t seem to be keeping up with what Valak can and cannot do and to whom.

This lack of consistency within the character gets to the heart of the problem with this franchise: The creators churn them out so fast they don’t try to keep them consistent. It’s what some people complain about with the “Star Trek” franchise. The TV shows adhere to canon most of the time. If it happened on the original 1960’s series, it is referred to as the history of future series. There are occasional tweaks to make modern storylines work and still pay homage to the past, but you don’t have full reboots of canon events just so an episode works (just ignore the Kelvan universe in this example). “The Nun II” pays very little attention to what Valak’s abilities and powers are even from one scene to the next. It’s frustrating as the film plays out with this seemingly all-powerful demon being limited to blowing out candles and burning out lightbulbs in one scene, then setting a character on fire the next.

“The Nun II” is rated R for violent content and some terror. A priest is burned alive. Another character is set ablaze but is saved. We see photos of other priests and nuns killed in various way. A character is grabbed by the throat and lifted off the ground. A character is slammed to a stone floor and their head bashed a couple of times into it. A woman is beaten with an incense burner used in Catholic mass then is killed by a piece of construction equipment falling on her head. Children are chased by a humanoid goat and one child is gored in the chest. Foul language is either infrequent or non-existent.

“The Nun II” is a blah film. It exists merely to add to the tally of “The Conjuring” franchise total box office. I don’t know why these films are getting so boring, but they are. I hope the title for the next film, “The Conjuring: Last Rites,” is an omen that perhaps these films are coming to an end, but I doubt it. They will have to start consistently losing money before Discovery/Warner Bros. puts this franchise out to pasture. I suppose I can only hope they either quit making them or they get better.

“The Nun II” gets two stars out of five.

Follow, rate, review and download the podcast Comedy Tragedy Marriage. Each week my wife and I take turns picking a movie to watch, watch it together, then discuss why we love it, like it or loath it. Find it wherever you get podcasts.

Follow me on Twitter (or if you prefer, X) @moviemanstan. I’m also on Threads and Spoutible @stanthemovieman.

Review of “The Invisible Man”

Cecilia Kass (Elisabeth Moss) has recently escaped an abusive relationship from Adrian Griffin (Oliver Jackson-Cohen). Adrian nearly caught Cecilia, but her sister Emily (Harriet Dyer) picked her up and drove her away to safety. Living with her cop friend James Lanier (Aldis Hodge) and his soon-to-leave-for-college daughter Sydney (Storm Reid), Cecilia is afraid to walk outside fearing Adrian will find her. That fear finally dissipates when Emily tells her Adrian has died by suicide. Cecilia receives a letter from Adrian’s lawyer and brother Tom (Michael Dorman) that she is Adrian’s heir. At a meeting in his office, Tom informs Cecilia she is inheriting $5 million, distributed in monthly $100,000 payments, as long as she doesn’t violate any of the will’s stipulations. If she is charged with a violent crime and/or she’s found mentally incompetent, she will forfeit the money. Unconcerned about the conditions, Cecilia sets up a college fund for Sydney as a thank you to her and James for housing and protecting her. But soon, Cecilia feels like she’s being watched. Her portfolio of architecture drawings disappears, and she is drugged, causing her to pass out at a job interview, among other odd occurrences. She begins to believe Adrian isn’t dead and is somehow responsible. Her sister, James and Tom all believe she is losing her mind, but Cecilia knows there’s something more.

In 2017, Universal Studios had big plans for its classic monsters. Hugely popular in the 1930’s and later decades, Dracula, Wolfman, Gill Man, Frankenstein’s Monster, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Mummy and Invisible Man had series of financially successful B-movies, but in recent times were largely unused, with the exception of occasional one-off’s. Then the Dark Universe was announced with a lineup of A-list actors like Johnny Depp, Russell Crowe, and Javier Bardem, scheduled to star in origin, but interconnected, movies then form a monster team-up. The first of these films was “The Mummy” starring the current superstar of superstars, Tom Cruise. The film was critically panned, and audiences largely stayed home. It grossed over $400 million worldwide but, on a budget of nearly $200 million, it likely cost Universal tens of millions in losses. The Dark Universe had a wooden stake driven through its heart. Now, Universal has changed course and is producing smaller, standalone films with its classic monsters, the first of which is “The Invisible Man.” If this film is any indication, Universal may eventually have the Dark Universe they dreamed of.

“The Invisible Man” isn’t some globetrotting blockbuster adventure like “The Mummy,” but a small and simple story of a woman trying to escape a controlling, manipulative and abusive man. It’s something audiences can sadly relate to more than an international spy slapping on a high-tech suit or drinking a magic formula and turning invisible. It’s a story of power, control, money and sex. It’s a #MeToo horror story with a bit of razzmatazz thrown in. Bullies can be invisible on the Internet, wielding their words like a cudgel, threatening death, financial ruin and sexual exploitation while maintaining their own anonymity behind a screenname and avatar. While “The Invisible Man” is more hands-on in his efforts to harm and manipulate, the effects are just as devastating.

Elisabeth Moss is so very good as Cecilia. Her PTSD in the immediate aftermath of leaving Adrian is heartbreaking as she cannot leave her friend’s house. She keeps her eyes down, her body is a tight coil of fear waiting to spring out of danger’s way. When she sees a jogger wearing a dark sweat suit with his hoody up and dark sunglasses hiding his eyes, she runs away fearing it is her abuser. Once she believes he’s dead, Cecilia is once again subjected to fearing for her safety and sanity as she is attacked again and again. Moss can deliver a frantic and tortured performance like few others. Her work on Hulu’s “The Handmaid’s Tale” has earned her both Golden Globe and Emmy Awards for her acting. She was also a standout on the AMC show “Madmen.” Moss is a powerhouse in the role of Cecilia, and I hope her work doesn’t get ignored during next awards season because the film came out early in the year, and because it’s a genre film. Her performance is deserving of consideration.

Writer/director Leigh Whannell has designed a tight and fast-paced tale of psychological revenge and physical escape. It’s a masterclass in economical film making. Whannell’s script doesn’t waste one moment on unnecessary dialog or meaningless sentimentality. It is a relentless film that rarely takes its foot off the gas. Even quiet moments are fraught with unending tension. From the opening scene until the surprising ending, the audience is never sure what’s about to happen but knows something eventually will. I found myself looking in the background for objects to move or footprints to appear, sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. No matter what, you expect something to happen and that makes the tension more excruciating. Whannell wisely keeps the audience guessing about the next surprise and doesn’t tip his hand with cheap tricks. All the fear generated by the film is earned and it’s exhausting.

“The Invisible Man” is rated R for some strong bloody violence, and language. There are numerous shootings, and most have some blood spray. We briefly see a picture of Adrian’s suicide, also bloody. Two necks are slit and there is a great deal of blood from those. An invisible assailant picks up Cecilia and threatens her with a knife. There are a couple of fights between visible and invisible combatants. One character is beaten bloody. A young woman is threatened and thrown around. Foul language is surprisingly rare.

Jason Blum and his Blumhouse Productions is one of the producers of “The Invisible Man.” Blum is known for his low-budget and obscenely profitable films including “Get Out,” “Paranormal Activity,” “Insidious,” “The Purge,” and many, many more films and franchises in the horror genre. “The Invisible Man” had a production budget of $7 million, and an estimated opening weekend domestic gross of $29 million. Depending on pre-release promotion, the film has probably already turned a profit and will continue to ring up revenue for Universal and Blumhouse. It is yet another example of how genre films don’t need to throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the screen when some well-done sleight of hand can produce the same if not better results. Of course, that won’t stop the next budget-busting blockbuster from nearly bankrupting a studio (James Cameron, I’m talking to you), but it should be yet another lesson to producers that bigger isn’t always better.

“The Invisible Man” gets five fully visible stars.

This week, four new films hope you vote with your dollars for the next leader of the box office. I’ll see and review at least one of the following:

Emma—

First Cow—

Onward—

The Way Back—

Listen to Comedy Tragedy Marriage, a podcast about life, love and entertainment, available wherever you get podcasts. Follow me on Twitter @moviemanstan and send emails to stanthemovieman123@gmail.com.