Ouija: Origin of Evil (2016)
In 1965 Los Angeles, a widowed mother and her two daughters add a new stunt to bolster their séance scam business and unwittingly invite authentic evil into their home. When the youngest daughter is overtaken by the merciless spirit, this small family confronts unthinkable fears to save her and send her possessor back to the other side.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
I enjoyed the movie but I really wanted it to be scary. It seemed to have potential but sadly? It's as scary as a Road Runner cartoon. Glad to see Eliot from E.T. is still getting work. In a nutshell... Lame
Did Mike Flanagan & Jeff Howard even watch the first movie? I originally gave this movie a rating of 7. I thought Lulu Wilson was spectacular and creepy. It was an original story and did have some nice creepy moments. Then I made the mistake of watching the first movie. So many inaccuracies from one movie to the next. Origin took place in 1967 as spelled out on the screen. The original movie said the pictures where from the 40s or 50s. The story in the paper in the original stated Doris was 10. In Origin, she specifically told the priest she was 9. In the original, the girls were much closer in age in the pictures. In Origin, they were at least 6 years apart. In the original, "Paulina" claims her mother was the one forcing Doris to let the spirits in and who sewed Doris' mouth shut. In Origin, "Lina" sewed Doris' mouth shut and her mother had nothing to do with the spirits invading Doris. Pauline says in the original movie "Maybe there is more than one spirit", but we know from Origin there were many spirits, all of the people tortured by the doctor. Again, did the writers of Origin watch the original movie? One other gripe I have: I hate, hate, hate when the vengeful spirits are the victims of someone else. If they themselves were victims of this horrible doctor, why would they then go on to hurt this little girl and her family? Why wouldn't it have been the doctor or the other spirits Marcus had referred to in his writing? That line never makes sense to me. Oh, I was hurt in my life so now I am going to hurt others after I am dead? Bad choice.Bottom line, don't make a prequel / sequel if it has no bearing on the original. I changed my rating to a 4.
Can we pleaseeeee stop with the "giant mouth opening" shi*t? Like it was freaky the first time we saw it. I laugh every time now. The movie is pretty unoriginal. I am a fan of ghosts/creepy movies. The atmosphere wasnt that creepy. The acting was pretty good. A few of the jumpy scenes were good. Youll want to put this one on in the background while youre doing homework or something.
The power of suggestion just can't be underestimated. When my expectations are high I'm disappointed, but when they low, and really, really low in this case, I'm often intrigued. And yet, that doesn't distort the fact that Ouija part two is a miracle. An awful, timeworn premise (the Ouija), a vapid predecessor, and an almost certainty a worse film than, for example, "I know what you did last summer part two." Turns out this one is a very, very good movie. It doesn't deserve an 8, probably more a 7, but I gave it a bump just because of the miracle.