1956 in France, a priest is horribly murdered. An evil is spreading. Once again, Sister Irene comes face-to-face with Valak, the demon nun.1956 in France, a priest is horribly murdered. An evil is spreading. Once again, Sister Irene comes face-to-face with Valak, the demon nun.1956 in France, a priest is horribly murdered. An evil is spreading. Once again, Sister Irene comes face-to-face with Valak, the demon nun.
- Awards
- 1 win & 12 nominations total
Summary
Reviewers say 'The Nun II' receives mixed feedback, with praise for its enhanced atmosphere, cinematography, and jump scares. Fans appreciate the return of Sister Irene and Frenchie, and the expanded demon nun backstory. However, criticisms include reliance on clichés, a predictable plot, and underdeveloped characters. Some find the scares less effective and the pacing uneven, though it's seen as a slight improvement over the first film by some.
Featured reviews
So, I was actually quite looking forward to this one. I wasn't expecting much from the original since sequels, prequel's and spinoffs often times are not up to par with their predecessors. However, I was quite pleasantly surprised with the first Nun and still think that it is a wildly underrated horror. So, after viewing this one, I must say that I was pretty disappointed. It was not a bad film by any means, but it did not live up to the quality of the first one and really landed in a very mediocre place.
It had a quick start and didn't waste any time, throwing us into the action. Yet, even then, I stopped and thought "well, that could've been cooler ". This same sentiment persisted throughout the majority of the film. It gave us some fun and creepiness, but then proceeded to move at a snails pace for quite some time. It felt like we were about 45 minutes in until I got any semblance of a real story line or something particularly intriguing. It really felt like they were going through the motions, an outline for a horror movie. As if they were following a map with very similar chain of events as the original.
It is no secret that this franchise loves a jump scare. The first one was full of them, however, it was also balanced out by genuinely creepy and cool effects with a general effective spook factor. This one had a bit of that, but was mostly just riddled with cheap, unnecessary and superfluous jump scares. Even most of the kills, while still entertaining, were pretty basic. At the same time there were also some effective imagery especially in the third act, some gnarly effects, and some pretty awesome stunts that stuck out.
I think my biggest issue with this is that the first one felt very deliberate and purposeful in many ways. It felt planned out and detailed... whereas this one felt like it was thrown together with the very bare minimum they could get away with as far as storyline went. Again, not a bad film, but nowhere near the quality of the first one for me. Would recommend, but not vehemently.
(Also, what's up with all these fake reviews? Weird. Lol)
IG - howlingatthemoonreviews.
It had a quick start and didn't waste any time, throwing us into the action. Yet, even then, I stopped and thought "well, that could've been cooler ". This same sentiment persisted throughout the majority of the film. It gave us some fun and creepiness, but then proceeded to move at a snails pace for quite some time. It felt like we were about 45 minutes in until I got any semblance of a real story line or something particularly intriguing. It really felt like they were going through the motions, an outline for a horror movie. As if they were following a map with very similar chain of events as the original.
It is no secret that this franchise loves a jump scare. The first one was full of them, however, it was also balanced out by genuinely creepy and cool effects with a general effective spook factor. This one had a bit of that, but was mostly just riddled with cheap, unnecessary and superfluous jump scares. Even most of the kills, while still entertaining, were pretty basic. At the same time there were also some effective imagery especially in the third act, some gnarly effects, and some pretty awesome stunts that stuck out.
I think my biggest issue with this is that the first one felt very deliberate and purposeful in many ways. It felt planned out and detailed... whereas this one felt like it was thrown together with the very bare minimum they could get away with as far as storyline went. Again, not a bad film, but nowhere near the quality of the first one for me. Would recommend, but not vehemently.
(Also, what's up with all these fake reviews? Weird. Lol)
IG - howlingatthemoonreviews.
In my opinion, the character "The Nun a.k.a (Valak)" was best portrayed in the movie "The Conjuring 2". I didn't like its first solo movie. The atmosphere wasn't bad, but I didn't like it anyway. I didn't like the second movie either. It could be better. In terms of atmosphere, it wasn't as good as the first movie. The plot of the movie was poor. There ara lots of horror movie clichés. There were many jump-scare scenes. I thought it was out of fashion nowadays, but they used it too much in this movie. This spoils the viewing pleasure. There were a few scenes that I liked very much. Even though it was a jump-scare scene, I liked the goat scene. The acting was good, of course, but the weak script. BTW Bonnie Aarons was great again.
Another let-down in the 'Conjuring' universe. Who would've guessed? Apparently, just having creepy looking villainous characters isn't enough to make a strong horror movie. 'The Nun' is a very creepy looking character, there's no doubt about that. But these films do not seem to know how to use her properly.
The funny thing in these films to me, is when it's a minor character in danger - instant death. But when it is a major character in the movie - seemingly all 'The Nun' wants to do it jump out and scare you over and over again. It just makes no sense and really deflates all of the tension out of the movie.
If you're a fan of jump-scares then there's good news. You're likely going to have a good time with this one. The movie is riddled with them. Some are well done, others not so much. The problem with horror movies based entirely around jump-scares is that they are instantly forgettable. Maybe you remember one jump scare if it was especially well done, but you certainly never remember the film as a whole.
And I think that's the biggest problem here. There was nothing new, or unique about this film. Nothing that I will still be thinking about a week (or even 24 hours) from now. Just another forgettable experience and $22 down the drain. 4.5/10.
The funny thing in these films to me, is when it's a minor character in danger - instant death. But when it is a major character in the movie - seemingly all 'The Nun' wants to do it jump out and scare you over and over again. It just makes no sense and really deflates all of the tension out of the movie.
If you're a fan of jump-scares then there's good news. You're likely going to have a good time with this one. The movie is riddled with them. Some are well done, others not so much. The problem with horror movies based entirely around jump-scares is that they are instantly forgettable. Maybe you remember one jump scare if it was especially well done, but you certainly never remember the film as a whole.
And I think that's the biggest problem here. There was nothing new, or unique about this film. Nothing that I will still be thinking about a week (or even 24 hours) from now. Just another forgettable experience and $22 down the drain. 4.5/10.
Well, well, well,....
I really like the first Nun....so lets keep this in mind. It was original scary and new. Many times we struggle with sequels and this is no exception. All I remember is maybe Spiderman 2,,can you tell me of another ?Anyway, I wasn't expecting so much so I kinda wasn't that disappointed! It tries to expand the Nun universe but does it work? Is it needed? Ummm.....is it even scary? They tried but there's nothing new here. I dont think the cgi is better here,neither. Yes, we know more about the nun demon ,the actors are doing their best and the cinematography is beautiful but there's something missing here!
Given that The Nun (2018) was nothing more than a polished-looking series of loud noises and nonsensical happenings, I was not looking forward to the sequel.
And even though The Nun II has its share of cheap scares and a few unintentionally funny moments, I was shocked by how much better it is than the first film.
Flashes of greatness are seen here-more often than not it's directed with considerable skill and far more restraint than the first movie was. It's quieter and more patient at first, fleshing out its characters before things get insane in the third act.
As for these character dynamics, they're actually interesting this time around. The dialogue is sometimes cheesy, but there's a sincerity to the humans in this story that gives a gripping quality to the film's perilous moments.
There's certainly quite a bit of bad to be found here, but I actually liked more of this than I didn't. Hopefully these movies will get back to being good.
And even though The Nun II has its share of cheap scares and a few unintentionally funny moments, I was shocked by how much better it is than the first film.
Flashes of greatness are seen here-more often than not it's directed with considerable skill and far more restraint than the first movie was. It's quieter and more patient at first, fleshing out its characters before things get insane in the third act.
As for these character dynamics, they're actually interesting this time around. The dialogue is sometimes cheesy, but there's a sincerity to the humans in this story that gives a gripping quality to the film's perilous moments.
There's certainly quite a bit of bad to be found here, but I actually liked more of this than I didn't. Hopefully these movies will get back to being good.
Did you know
- TriviaThe movie was filmed at an actual abandoned church in France.
- Goofs(at around 1h 35 mins) At the point when the two nuns are performing the transubstantiation after the barrels of wine spill out, this wouldn't have worked. According to the Catholic Church, only a priest can perform the transubstantiation of changing the bread and wine into the body and blood of Jesus. So this wine would've just been wine.
- Crazy creditsThere's a mid-credits scene.
- SoundtracksMoonlight Serenade
Written by Glenn Miller and Mitchell Parish
Performed by Mark 'Dr. SaxLove' Maxwell
Courtesy of Mark Maxwell Music
- How long is The Nun II?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- La Monja II
- Filming locations
- Couvent des Prêcheurs, Aix-en-Provence, Bouches-du-Rhône, France(boarding school interiors and cloister)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $38,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $86,267,073
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $32,603,336
- Sep 10, 2023
- Gross worldwide
- $269,667,073
- Runtime
- 1h 50m(110 min)
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content