The Last Exorcism Part II - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Last Exorcism Part II Reviews

Page 1 of 43
Super Reviewer
June 11, 2013
Despite the deliberate pacing that helps build tension, here is another sequel (to a good horror movie) that drops the subjective camera for no reason along with its main reason to exist - and it is hard not to be infuriated by its stupid, inconclusive ending.
Super Reviewer
July 11, 2013
*
This sequel is a complete waste of time. It picks up with Nell at a safe house in New Orleans, and the demon comes back for her. It isn't in POV like the first movie, and honestly doesn't have any real scary/creepy moments too it. Hell, they don't really address much of anything from the events of the first movie. It as is someone said "make a sequel!" so they rushed it and didn't put any creativity into it. The said "we'll just have Nell movie and forget everyone else." By the end, it isn't shocking or anything, your just ready for it to be over. Kind of boring, and after re-watching the first one, I thought they could have done so much more with it than what they did. They did leave it open for a third, but really, who would want to see it after this? Skip it, and just stick to the first one.
TheDudeLebowski65
Super Reviewer
July 2, 2013
Sequel to The Last Exorcism is a predictable affair that could have been much better than what it turned out to be. I really wanted to enjoy this, but I felt that the film relied on recycled ideas to create its terror. The horror itself is never really terrifying, only a bit unnerving and the filmmakers really could have done something truly special here. Unfortunately the movie suffers from a dull script and performance that just aren't interesting. This sequel just fails at delivering genuine chills and you end up wanting more out of the film. As it is, this is yet another clichéd horror film that doesn't cover new ground. With that being said, if they were going to make a sequel to the Last Exorcism, they should have put more effort into it because the original was truly an interesting horror film. The Last Exorcism 2 is just a bland horror movie that doesn't shock the way it's supposed to. The film is predictable and we know when everything will happen. This is a poor attempt at cashing in on the original, and they really should have made something better. The Last Exorcism 2 is just another bad horror movie that has been released this year and one that isn't worth your time. Stick with the original, it is a far superior film than this film, and this follow-up relies on old ideas that we've seen many times before. As a genre film, it simply doesn't deliver anything worthwhile for fans of Exorcism films, and it is a failed attempt at crafting a movie that should have been much better than what it turned out to be.
YodaMasterJedi
Super Reviewer
June 7, 2013
three stars
Frisby2007
Super Reviewer
½ February 27, 2013
Not since The Haunting of Molly Hartley have I laughed so hard at a horror film. I never saw the first one, but this poor excuse for a horror movie will have you laughing at everything going on than feeling any sense of fear. The fact that the director ruined the chance of showing us a possessed chicken is the nail on the coffin for this crap.
Super Reviewer
November 25, 2013
Putting aside how absurd a sequel to something called "The Last" anything sounds, here is my review of The Last Exorcism Part II:

The film is not entirely without merits. There's a couple of seriously great visuals. The opening sequence is quite a strong scene and setup (despite this though, it is promptly dropped all together). Ashley Bell in the leas role has proved herself a more than capable character actor, and the effects quality (while not great) has taken a step up since the previous instalment.

Aaaaand that's about every nice thing I can bring myself to say. Even before the mentions of salt lines and Croatoan I felt that it played out almost like an episode of Supernatural that's overly long and has intensely boring characters. Beyond links like this it still feels like an episode of a TV show. One that the events of which were initially meant to be crammed into the final five minutes of the penultimate episode for the season, but the show-runners realised that they were going to be an episode short for what they were commissioned to produce so the then had to stretch it out with fuller bullshit to make it into a full episode. Except that it's even worse, 'cause this isn't a twenty, thirty, forty or even fifty minute episode of something, it's a full hour and a half of crap, the previous "episode" of which we left behind three years ago.

It was offensive to devotees of the original (if any besides me exist, if not then at least to me). And it brought nothing off even remote interest to any potential newcomers. I can understand dropping the found footage format of the first film, that way lies Paranormal Activity, and avoiding any similarities with that stream of garbage is always a good plan. But beyond that, all change is bad change, and almost all events of the predecessor are unceremoniously cast aside.

I kept looking at the time while watching this and thinking to myself, "Wow it's a quarter of the way through and it's still just tension building", then "a third of the way through and it's still just tension building?" then half, then two thirds, then so and so forth until I got to the stage where there was nine minutes left and I realised that it wasn't "tension" at all, it was just lazy disjointed events that Botko and Gurland seem to think constitutes an actual film. I am a huge fan of suspense. Huge. But this was not suspense I felt, it was boredom. The payoff for which was a couple of seconds of poorly shot but semi-cool lead up to a potential third film the series doesn't deserve.

So Part II? It was, truly awful. But it still in no way effects my opinion of the film this is a sequel to. The Last Exorcism, was, and remains a solid and original piece of cinema.

22%

-Gimly
themoviewaffler.com
Super Reviewer
June 8, 2013
Nell (Bell), the possessed girl seen in the first film, is admitted to a New Orleans home for troubled girls. Her life begins to get on track as she makes friends and takes a job as a chambermaid at a local motel. When she visits a parade in the city with her friends, however, Nell begins to have strange experiences, seemingly followed by a group of masked men and street mimes. Telephones begin to ring when they're not plugged in and voices attempt to speak to Nell through radio sets. It seems Nell may not have escaped her traumatic past.
Last year, for the third installment of the 'Rec' series, the film-makers cast aside the found-footage aesthetic about a half hour into the film. For the sequel to 2010's 'The Last Exorcism', found-footage is discarded completely. It could be taken as a sign that the sub-genre is finally dead, although this Halloween we'll be treated to yet another shaky-cam episode of the 'Paranormal Activity' series. The 2010 film was strangely under-rated, possibly because it had the hated name of Eli Roth attached as producer. With that film, I recall thinking the found-footage format was no more than an unnecessary gimmick as it had a strong enough story to stand on its own. This sequel, however, could badly use a gimmick.

Much of the film revolves around a litany of tired horror cliches, all of which we've seen employed in far more effective ways in much more successful films. Even the New Orleans setting has become a default fallback for American horror films, thanks to the city's historic relationship with the practice of voodoo. Bell admittedly does her best with a Sissy Spacek type "sympathetic yet creepy" performance. Garner, one of America's best young actresses, is wasted in a support role, though it does add to her growing back catalog of movies regarding cults, having appeared in last year's 'Martha Marcy May Marlene' and 'Electrick Children'.
The main problem is that the threat to Nell is never really made concrete. A horror film's success often relies on its villain. 'The Last Exorcism Part II' ultimately collapses due to its lack of a clearly identified one.
Super Reviewer
½ March 7, 2013
Making every mistake possible, The Last Exorcism Part II has none of the wit or terror of the original. Reverting to a formulaic and stereotypical horror film, the story follows Nell Sweetzer as she recovers in a halfway house following her ordeal with a cult, but the evil continues to stalk her. The switch from a documentary to a narrative doesn't work, and Nell isn't a strong enough character to carry the film. The Last Exorcism Part II is a massive train wreck that has no concept of what made the original so compelling.
Super Reviewer
½ January 19, 2013
The Last Exorcism: Part II is that classic timeless example that Hollywood horror sequels never work and are just a waste of time and money. When I went to see the original film I enjoyed its found footage method and the way it handled its tension and characters, and although it wasn't great I still thought it was an effective horror film. But this film loses almost complete track of what made the first film interesting and clever, and this ends up being nothing but crap. The beginning of every year is filled with a bunch of crappy horror films that nobody wants to see, and that is precisely why they put it at the start of the year. There is a small piece of footage from the original film in this movie, and I promise you that is going to be the scariest part of this film. I mean I can't remember seeing a horror film that was actually as non-scary as this one. I was never frightened, or shaking, or even closing my eyes, I just sat there and looked at the time to see when I could leave. It's hard to fully explain how unoriginal and predictable a film like this is, and if you watch the end of the film you know they are preparing another sequel and this scares me. I don't want to pay more of my money to see another bad and uninteresting sequel with no reason to exist, because this film has already accomplished that. Ashley Bell is probably one of the most awkward and uninteresting actresses of her generation, and I sincerely hope she doesn't continue her career in the horror genre. If you are looking to spend money on a scary time, I suggest you turn around and run away as fast as you can.

The story follows Nell (Ashley Bell) as she is returned to a normal life after the events of the first movie, away from her brother and father. But she is brought back into her old life when supernatural things start occurring around her and her friends.

The plot is so pointless, predictable, boring, deficient, nonsensical, laughable, and overall just plain bad that I hate having to write a review for it. I didn't care about any of the characters, and most of them spend time just being clichés that I could've cared less what happened to them. This is a concept that hundreds of horror films have done before, but the producers must believe because it's a sequel to a moderate box-office success that somehow it will make for good filmmaking, but they were wrong. But I think what made me mostly angry about this ludicrous story is the same problems most horror movies have, and that is the fact that it's just not scary. When I pay my money to be scared, I expect the movie to actually be slightly scary, but sadly this film depends all on cheap and pathetic jump scares that wouldn't scare a 2-year old. Some people believe that I give horror films a hard time because I am not a fan of horror films, but on the contrary I love horror films but only if I feel that I have been scared. I enjoy old school horror films such as "The Shining" or "The Exorcist," and sadly I haven't seen a horror film in years that could even come close to classics like those films. This film feels like it wants to become some big franchise like "Saw" or "Paranormal Activity" but if you ask me it couldn't survive becoming a series. Characters that are boring and one-dimensional, a story that completely depends on the original film, and a concept that has been used many times before by many better films. I hated the script, and I think the money grubbing filmmakers could've cared less.

The cast mainly consists of Bell's boring and talentless performance, and it disappoints me because she actually gave the original film a spark of hope. Ashley Bell gave a mysterious, dangerous, and even creepy performance in this films predecessor, but that was mainly because she was a supporting character. Now the writers decided it would be smart to make her the star of the film and carry the weight of the entire cast, which might've been the dumbest move I have seen in a long time. She just seems sick the entire film, and I realize this is the point of her character, but it just doesn't work with my taste. She just sees a lot of danger but she rarely is actually under any danger, and I think we see her yell and scream more than just talking. She hasn't become a popular actress or even well known, and so I don't know why they believed it would be smart to make her star in this film. There is a small number of supporting actors in the film that I will not even bother mentioning, because my guess is that this is the highest any of their careers are going to get. Overall Bell's awkward and senseless performance can't carry any of the weight of the films witless story.

The Last Exorcism: Part II bored me to death and destroyed any chance of this becoming a franchise. Director Ed Gass-Donnelly had high hopes when I saw his film "Small Town Murder Songs" which was a well-directed and written film, but now I believe he has shattered the progress he made with that previous film and has given us a sloppy and laughable horror flick. He gives this horror film no soul or edge to make us actually care about what is going on, and it feels like they made this as quickly as possible so he could just take his money and go home. This film reminds of when I was told they were making a sequel to "The Human Centipede," a film that some people enjoyed and some people just couldn't swallow. Some people were very disappointed also with "The Last Exorcism" so why on earth would they decide to make sequels for these two films? Sometimes I wonder what could be going on in a filmmakers head, and I just miss the days when horror films actually used to be fun and scary. This film tries nothing new and has nothing to show us other than a few flashy jump scares that, as I said before, couldn't scare a baby. I think most people will have a good sense and realize what a piece of trash this is, and I hope most people will have some common sense and just stay home and save their money for a better film.
PantaOz
Super Reviewer
½ August 1, 2013
This supernatural horror is the sequel of The Last Exorcism which makes it after last... which makes the previous one not last, but this one is last... or there will be another one which will make those both titles obsolete, and the third one will be last... sorry - I could not resist! This film is co-written and directed by Ed Gass-Donnelly, and Ashley Bell is in her old role in this continuation of the events from the 2010 movie with the same name (without part II). Compared to its predecessor, it is not presented in a found footage format, and it is not as appealing to the audience, except the repeated excellent performance of Ashley Bell. The story doesn't help you get involved and most of the time raises more questions than it answers. Somehow, the ending was left open, and until then most of the movie was filled with horror clichés with no motivation to go for real imaginative scares.

Some parts were on the edge, but most of the time everything was familiar and there are no surprises - this part was not at all as ambitious as its predecetor. Effects were not bad, but, again, I wished for something exciting... and there was nothing at the end. Just an average horror which is far from what should be associated with the name Exorcism, regarding the quality!
Super Reviewer
½ March 19, 2013
Though sometimes effectively creepy despite scaring away the found footage premise of its predecessor, the contradictorily titled The Last Exorcism Part II ultimately goes the way of the Blair Witch sequel. It's ludicrously ironic that buzzing flies often pester the actors in this steaming piece of digital. For every legitimate fright swept out of some dark new corners (thrills courtesy of a living statue street performer moving whenever the protagonist turns her head, an in-house massacre shot from an outdoor POV), there's a bevy of oldest spooks in the Book of Shadows (LOUD sound design, jump cuts) that makes this a devil of a dog.

In the PG-13-rated thriller sequel, newly exorcised Nell Sweetzer (Ashley Bell) tries to build a new life in a New Orleans home for troubled women, only the demon that once possessed her returns with a more horrific plan.

As possessed backwoods belle Sweetzer, Bell imbues the character with believable levels of both naïveté and ferociousness. Likewise, director Ed Gass-Donnelly works the horror over with some appropriately scary touches. Still, for all of their hard work, the material needs to have the archetypical demonic moments exorcised. Moviegoers have seen possession portrayed on screen numerous times before (The Devil Inside) and seen it done much much better besides (The Exorcist). Losing the faux-documentary style of Part I certainly distances this deuce as far as look and feel, but audiences didn't need to see The Last Exorcism -no classic piece of horror itself - to despise this latest in a long grime of pea soup.

Bottom line: Speaking in Bungs.
Super Reviewer
February 22, 2013
Not a very good sequel to the original, (which I really liked).
Director: "Hey! I have an idea for a sequel! Let's turn this super creepy found-footage movie...Into a Theatrical Over-Cliched Horror Movie!"
Although the idea was pretty cool...It just wasn't as effective as the first one.
The scares were cheap...The acting was bleh...and it overall bored me.
Could've benn alot better.
Super Reviewer
½ March 10, 2013
All credit must be given to Ashley Bell, the wonderful young actress who, yet again, takes on the role of Nell Sweetzer, reprising her role from the previous film "The Last Exorcism". In "Part II" of this hopefully two part saga, Nell returns from the events on the farm, a tormented and reclusive young girl. She's placed in a group home and attempts to return her life to some sort of normalcy. Obviously, we can assume this won't happen lightly, if at all. Along with Bell's impressive performance, including a vulnerability and naivety that could easily have been overdone by any other young actress, the scares help keep this film afloat, building tense moments with ease, starting from scene one in a stranger's bed. Made even more creepy by being placed on the streets of New Orleans, not only does "The Last Exorcism Part II" delve further than I possibly could have imaged, it actually does so in a somewhat refreshing and unique way. Had the ending been stronger and less of a throwaway, this could have been an above average film. Instead, it rises from its preconceptions and gains at least some sort of respectable stature.
½ May 15, 2016
Though it drops the found footage aspect and tries to build a decent sense of atmosphere. This sequel to the surprisingly good original movie lacks it's frights and better yet, any sense of coherence as it just meanders along a series of random plot points that just lay down until it's terrible ending
½ October 1, 2015
I had hoops for this since the first one was pretty effective. but in the long run I feel it owes me money for spending the time watching it. there was only jump scares, no tension and the ending was absolutely horrid.
½ March 16, 2013
At least it's not limited by being found-footage style like the first, but there really wasn't much reason for another Last Exorcism. The story never takes off, the characters never get interesting, and the ending is too dumb to leave a impact.
October 27, 2014
This pointless sequel abandons the found footage aspect of the first movie as well as anything that made the first movie even remotely redeemable. While the acting is somewhat competent enough to give the picture a star the pace is boring, and the writing is often times embarrassing. Its modern horror at its worst in that sense that seems like a cheap cash in rather than a movie designed to come up with any original scares or make any damn sense
September 25, 2014
Sigh- what horror movies have come to. If you are terrifyingly bored and need a bit of thrill this may suffice, but other then that I would not bother. I was left unsatisfied, not a shred scared, bored and bothered. At the ending it seemed as though they were aiming for another sequel, hopefully they do not go that route. I walked out of the theater, went home and watched a real horror movie because I was so unsatisfied and unaffected by this sad excuse for a scary movie.
August 22, 2014
"The Last Exorcism Part II" continues the story of Nell and the demon who wants her-Abalam. With a new director but the same actress as the first film, Ashley Bell. "Part II" is straight up horror story telling in a classic format. There is no documentary style footage present save the internet shot of the footage from the first film so the opportunity to really utilize basic but brilliant gimmicks for shock and thrills are very well in hand for this film. Which I think the director managed to use quite well without being too obvious or any real "fail" issue for the most part. The story has Nell moved to New Orleans and on her way to rehabilitation for a new start with new friends. However Abalam is not done with the young girl and there will be no salvation for her in the city.

As far as the film's ability to bring the scares I have to say that the film did it's job. There were moments that normally would not have been scary nor interesting in the film but because the director utilized the trick of closed in frame shots, in most of the scenes, random moments became thrilling. The story is more focused and open to the viewer with no real hidden plot, which allows for more imagery and dogma that surround the whole possession culture. It allows for a more mystical icon-ism to play a big part in staging the story. It is a true classic horror story in all ways. That normally would seem like a bad thing but thankfully this director knew how to shoot the film and set up the moments that needed to be scary or exaggerated enough to make the movie work. Until the ending of course. That I have issue with. I appreciated the twist that says not every one gets a Hallmark moment but for me it came off cheesy and that boiled down to the use of CGI when more organic FX would have came off better for what the director was going for. "The Last Exorcism Part II" is a better story and movie than the first film but the first film had a way better ending. There must be a third film in the works because there where some elements of the over all story that were only vaguely highlighted and need to be unveiled in this character's grander story.
Page 1 of 43