While it may be difficult to fault James Wan for his technique, as he is clearly a student of 70's horror filmmaking, I can at the very least criticize him for not deploying that skill in the service of stronger scripts. The long takes, the slow zooms, the Argento-esque lighting - they don't rouse as much feeling when in the context of a forgettable PG-13 spookfest aimed at multiplex-going teenagers.
I'm getting so tired of these new "jump-scare-movies" that it hurts. The first Insidious was forgettable with decent scares and the second one does nothing to improve on Wan's formula. It all feels like a bunch of jump-scares strung together by a paper thin plot that is barely an excuse for a movie. Wan does nothing to make us care for the characters, the score is boring and the production work flat.
A frustrating and disappointingly scattershot sequel that feels like Wan is just going through the paces and it may as well have been directed by anybody. A mere trifle compared to the achievements of the first one and nowhere near as wonderful or frightening as The Conjuring (Wan's best film to date).
"nsidious 2, como filme policiaco, se gana cierta simpatía al crear coherencias y encajes frente a los otros tiempos, tanto los correspondientes a la precuela como los que pertenecen al pasado de Josh. No sé por qué se me vino a la mente la trilogía de Volver al futuro e Inception (2010), de Christopher Nolan. Como filme terror, James Wan hizo la inversa de El conjuro..." http://bit.ly/1bwzAdJ
Effective followup to the surprise hit finds Wan expanding and folding back the events of the first installment in a rather satisfying way. The lack of surprise in this chapter hurts the film but is somewhat compensated for by the performances. Mind you some of the scripting choices are dubious at best. Nice set up for a third installment though.