“The Conjuring 2” is a haunted-house picture that wants to scare you twice. It is also a sequel that leans harder on family drama than its predecessor did, and the shift costs it some of the pure fright that made the original work. The film follows Ed and Lorraine Warren, paranormal investigators who travel to London to help a family terrorized by a malevolent entity. It is based on true events, and it plays them with a mix of reverence and cheap shock value that does not always land.
The movie opens in 1977, with the Hodgson family living in a cramped, rundown flat in north London. The mother, Margaret, works nights at a factory. Her children, especially the youngest son, see things that are not there. The Warrens arrive to investigate, and the film spends its middle stretch building dread through a series of escalating supernatural encounters. The climax involves a demonic presence that the filmmakers treat with theatrical flair, though the payoff is more about spectacle than genuine fear.
The Warrens are played by Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga, who also starred in the first film. Their chemistry carries the picture, even when the script asks them to deliver speeches about faith and evil that feel like boilerplate horror dialogue. The Hodgson children are played by young actors who are asked to bear witness to horrors beyond their years. The performances are competent, but the story often treats them as props rather than people.
Trailer, via Warner Bros..
Margaret and the Hodgson Family
The Hodgson family is the heart of “The Conjuring 2,” and the film invests real time in their domestic life before the supernatural starts. Margaret is a working mother trying to keep her children safe in a world that seems determined to destroy them. Her husband, Bill, is absent from the narrative, and the film never explains why. That absence feels like a deliberate choice, one that lets the story focus entirely on the maternal line of conflict.
The children are the real engine of the film’s emotional stakes. They see ghosts, hear voices, and feel presences that the adults cannot. Their fear is palpable, and the film earns its scares by grounding them in the mundane details of their daily lives: school, meals, bedtime. When the supernatural breaks through, the contrast is jarring. The film wants you to care about these kids before it unleashes the monster, and for the most part, it succeeds.
The Warrens’ Partnership
Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga return as the Warrens, and their partnership remains the film’s strongest asset. Their scenes together crackle with tension and warmth in equal measure. Wilson plays Ed as a man of action, while Farmiga plays Lorraine as a woman of faith. The dynamic is familiar from the first film, but the sequel gives it new wrinkles. Together, they form the anchor of a story that sometimes drifts away from them.
Their investigation in London is the spine of the plot. They document evidence, interview witnesses, and perform rituals meant to contain the evil. The film shows them working as a team, but it also separates them at times, sending each off on solo missions that feel like setup for later scenes. This pacing is uneven, and it stretches the runtime without adding much substance.
“There is evil here.”
That line, spoken by Lorraine near the climax, sums up the film’s approach to its subject. The Warrens believe in evil, and they fight it with tools both physical and spiritual. The film respects their belief without questioning it, which gives the proceedings a moral clarity that some viewers will find refreshing. Others will find it simplistic.
The True Story
“The Conjuring 2” is based on real events, and the filmmakers lean into that fact throughout. The Warrens are real figures in American history, and their work with the Hodgson family has been documented extensively. The film is a horror movie first, and a historical one second.
The real-life Warrens were paranormal investigators who specialized in cases involving demonic entities. The film portrays them as devout Christians who use their faith to combat evil. That framing is consistent with the source material, and it gives the film a sense of authenticity that some viewers will appreciate. For others, the blending of fact and fiction may feel disingenuous.
The film’s marketing leaned heavily on the idea that this was a true story. That is technically accurate, but it is also misleading. The events are real, but the presentation is fictionalized. The film does not footnote its sources or explain where it diverges from the record. Viewers who want a documentary should look elsewhere.
The Poltergeist Comparison
“The Conjuring 2” shares a producer with “Poltergeist,” a 1982 film about a suburban family terrorized by a malevolent force. Both films deal with demonic possession and poltergeist activity, and both feature families in suburban homes being tormented by unseen forces. The similarities are striking, and they suggest that the filmmakers were drawing on the same cultural wellspring.
The comparison is useful because it highlights what “The Conjuring 2” does differently. “Poltergeist” is a more contained story, centered on a single family and a single house. “The Conjuring 2” is broader, moving between London and the Warrens’ home in Connecticut. The result is a film that is less focused but more ambitious.
Both films also share a similar visual palette. They use darkness, shadows, and sudden bursts of light to create unease. The difference is that “Poltergeist” was made with practical effects, while “The Conjuring 2” relies heavily on CGI. The older film feels more grounded, while the newer one feels more polished.
The London Setting
The London setting is a major asset for “The Conjuring 2.” The film captures the city’s grim, industrial streets with a cold, gray palette that suits the story. The Hodgsons live in a flat that feels cramped and oppressive, and the Warrens navigate a city that is foreign to them. The contrast between the two worlds is used effectively, though the film does not spend enough time establishing the London backdrop.
The film uses the city as a character, and it works. The Warrens are outsiders in a strange land, and their unfamiliarity with the local customs adds to the tension. The London setting also allows the filmmakers to explore a different kind of horror than the suburban nightmare of the first film. The contrast is effective, but it is also a missed opportunity. The film could have done more with the city’s history and its current state.
The Demon’s Weakness
The demon at the center of “The Conjuring 2” is the film’s main antagonist, and it is treated with a mix of reverence and camp. The demon is powerful, ancient, and hungry for souls. The film shows it through flashes of light, disembodied voices, and sudden movements. It is a classic horror construct, and the film handles it with competence.
The demon is also the weakest element of the film. Its motivations are unclear, and its actions feel arbitrary. The film sets up a confrontation between the Warrens and the demon, but the resolution is rushed. The final scene is over before it feels earned. Some viewers will find this frustrating, while others will appreciate the open-endedness.
The demon is a symbol of evil, and the film treats it as such. The Warrens fight it not just for the Hodgsons, but for everyone. The film suggests that evil is a force that can be fought, and that faith is the weapon. This is a message that some viewers will find comforting, while others will find it simplistic.
The Verdict on “The Conjuring 2”
“The Conjuring 2” is a solid, if uneven, entry in the horror genre. It has strong performances, a compelling true-story foundation, and a London setting that adds texture. But it is also weighed down by a bloated runtime, a weak villain, and a climax that feels rushed. The film is better than its reputation suggests, but it is not a masterpiece.
The film’s score reflects this assessment. It is a middling effort that deserves credit for its ambition but falls short of greatness. The film is worth seeing for fans of the genre, but it is not essential viewing. The best parts are the human ones: the Warrens’ partnership, the Hodgsons’ suffering, and the quiet moments of dread. The worst parts are the theatrical ones: the demon’s appearance, the over-the-top sound design, and the rushed ending.
“The Conjuring 2” is a mixed bag, and it is best enjoyed with low expectations. It is not the best horror film of its year, but it is not the worst either. It is a film that tries to do too much and ends up doing less than it could. The result is a movie that is watchable, but not memorable.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.
