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
I think I need to shift my perspective on what The Nun movies are supposed to be. The Conjuring films are great, full of scares, great writing. Annabelle is also pretty freaky. The Nun... feels more like Indiana Jones or a Disneyworld ride. Made-for-amusement-park action, props, and themes. Each time I go in expecting to be freaked out by "the greatest evil in the Conjuring Universe" just to walk away feeling like I went through a haunted house at Six Flags. The Nun II was not scary, barely interesting, and quite honestly boring at times. Conjuring Universe I love you, but let's send the Nun back to hell for good.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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
- Runtime1 hour 50 minutes
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content