The Last Exorcism: Part II (2013)

When it comes to film, few things are more upsetting to me than when a sequel takes something that was great and takes a big, steaming crap on it. I suppose I could elaborate further, but seeing as the poster for the film I'm speaking of is right next to the phrase "big, steaming crap" I'm guessing that would be unnecessary. I'm just not feeling subtle today, I suppose.

I really, really, really liked "The Last Exorcism." I thought it was one of the best horror movies of 2010, and second only to "The Blair Witch" project when it comes to the found-footage genre. It was suspenseful, well written and genuinely scary, with an ending that was impossible to call and threw me for a total loop. And best of all it was open to interpretation, and the ending's implications could easily change depending on who you talked to, with equally valid points all around. It was a really clever movie.

Then we've got "The Last Exorcism: Part II." I was afraid there would be a sequel, although I wasn't surprised when I heard that there was. The fact that a sequel seems literally impossible given the end of "The Last Exorcism" has little to do with the fact that there is no stopping Hollywood from trying to squeeze a few more bucks from a successful film by attempting to start a franchise. I can't blame them, as movies are a business, but it's a real shame that a bit more care couldn't have been put into a followup to a great film. After all, if this movie tanks, nobody will see a third one. At that defeats the purpose of attempting a franchise.

Before I go any further I'm going to come out and say that if you haven't seen "The Last Exorcism," there are going to be some significant spoilers to that film in here. And I'd suggest that if you're going to watch that movie, read no further, because a lot of the fun of that film is not knowing what's really going on. And really, that's a movie you should see because it's freaking awesome.

"The Last Exorcism: Part II" finds Nell in a home for wayward girls after the events of the first movie. She has little memory of it all, but is pretty tweaked out, as is understandable. Of course the film fluctuates back and forth as to whether or not she remembers what happened, but that's just good script writing. She begins hearing and seeing things that make it clear that the demon that possessed her in the first film is still around, and isn't done with her yet, and is intending to use her as a mortal vessel to do whatever it is that demons intend to do when they do that stuff.

Like rubbing one's face on the wall.

Right there is the biggest problem with this movie, and the reason a sequel is just a bad idea. Any mystery as to whether or not Nell was actually possessed during the first film is completely dissolved.  She totally was and still is possessed. The open to interpretation ending twists of "The Last Exorcism" have now been replaced with a solid answer that goes with the less interesting explanation. And to top everything off it also makes no sense because it begs the question "If the demon wants to use Nell as a vessel, then what was the point of the first movie?" I was under the impression that the ceremony at the end of "The Last Exorcism" saw the release of the demon. So what gives here?

None of this is explained to us, and in fact we are never told what ended up happening after the camera stopped rolling in the first film. Cotton is never mentioned, the film crew following him is never mentioned, Nell's brother is never mentioned, and none of the cultists are mentioned. The only person who shows up is Nell's father, who is somehow still alive, implying that the cultists released him to go about his business after they impregnated his daughter with a demon spawn. Apparently they assumed he wouldn't be mad about that. The movie doesn't even explain how Nell got away from the cultists in the first place, which might have been nice to know as it seemed to me that based on her situation, there was little chance of her going any-damn-where.

Oh yeah. I'd say his chances are great.

Is that nitpicking? Yeah I guess but I've never found it overly harsh to ask questions which boil down to "What the hell is everyone doing" when watching a film. And the best horror is always character driven at its core, and if the characters are just faffing about while doing things and saying things that make no sense, then how in the world am I suppose to care let alone be frightened?

And really, that's all "The Last Exorcism: Part II" is - faffing about. Nell faffs about in the home, she and her friends faff about doing girly things, she then faffs about with her kind-of boyfriend, and he faffs about trying to get in her pants. All this while creepy cultists appear every once in a while to say something creepy to her like "He's coming for you" and then leave. Making their presence known to her seems catastrophically stupid since that means she will 100% for sure know something is up and potentially seek help which might threaten to disrupt their whole scheme, which hey presto ends up happening, but hey I'm not an evil mastermind. What do I know?

So the evil cult looks like if Abbath Doom Occulta joined Linkin Park while touring with Boy George? That's...not that intimidating, really.

But as dumb as the cult was, had they not been so there would be no movie, because once again, it's simply Nell faffing about. The cultists had to be there to slowly follow her around town and say stupid stuff to her in really pathetic attempts at eliciting just the slightest bit of atmosphere. Otherwise we might as well be watching any random episode of "Breaking Amish."

Oh sure, by the end the demon finally does stuff, and the cultists basically disappear from the film once (shock) she attempts to get professional help. And the demon ends up winning, as is the case for movies of this nature, but it was never for anything that the cult did that I could tell. It seems that the plan succeed despite the efforts of its constructors. Unless they knew that by exposing themselves like idiots, Nell would run to another exorcist who would fail and by extension unleash the demon, but I think I'm giving them too much credit. The demon would have probably come out had they done nothing.

Speaking of endings, in the annals of bad endings that exist solely for the purposes of sequel-baiting, this has to be one of the worst I've ever seen. It's not as bad as "The Devil Inside," since it actually has one, but for the love of criminey, the end of "The Last Exorcism: Part II" is just the final kick to the naughty bits for us poor souls who were hoping for something worthwhile. But it did lead to the best unintentionally funny moment of the movie (of which there were plenty) which played out like one of the guys from "Jackass" doing the "out the window down the steps" sequence from the end of "The Exorcist."

Oh, and Nell is a straight up demon now. Yeah, I miss the subtlety of the first film, too.

You know, I really hope nothing else comes from this. I don't want a third entry. I really don't. Ashley Bell deserves better than this. She's a talented actress who has one of the most naturalistic screen presences I've seen, and I want to see her do more stuff worthy of someone of talent. Like bend over backwards in impossible, horrifying contortions and breaking her own fingers one by one as she taunts a preacher with oral sex.

What? Don't look at me like that. That was awesome.

Here's the trailer for "The Last Exorcism: Part II." Like the actual film, the best part is the footage from the first one.

THE BOTTOM LINE - "The Last Exorcism: Part II" is garbage. It's boring, it's stupid, it's not scary, and it completely misses the point of the first film by merely existing. The first 3 minutes are decent. Everything after that is worthy of only your spit on its shoes. I'm so mad about this.