Insidious: The Last Key (2018)

Did you people see the same film I saw?

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Blistering performances.

Some good ideas; unfortunately the film is weighed down by poor structure.

Para mí la primera parte, fue una gran película de terror. Volvía a ver cine de terror bueno después de mucho tiempo. En esta se juntan varios géneros, lo cual le viene mal y tiene demasiados chistes sin gracia y sustos fáciles pero a pesar de eso al final vuelve a la esencia Insidious y se eleva.Si es cierto que los chistes que hacen los chicos son malos, que acabas un poco harto de ellos y eso lastra la película, pero cuando desaparecen la película sube.La mezcla de géneros la hace peor, por un momento piensas que ya no vas a ver una de miedo sino un thriller, pero la película vuelve a sus orígenes.Usa demasiados sustos fáciles, que no usaba la primera, pero al final vuelve a su origen y con ello sube si bien, no saben terminarla y sobra la penúltima secuencia.Los actores no están del todo bien. Después de la médium de Polstergeist, no puedo imaginar otra médium. Ellos me cansan. Pero la película hace el resto.Tiene una fotografía espectacular que te mete de lleno en la película, solo la fotografía ya da miedo. Crea un ambiente magnifico.La dirección no me gusta, después de Wan haciendo películas de miedo, ver a otro, no es lo mismo. El ritmo tiene altibajos, no sabe usar la cámara. Recurre a susto fácil, pero sí que al final remonta.Veremos cómo es la quinta parte, porque por supuesto la habrá For me the first part, it was a great horror movie. I went back to see good horror movies after a long time. In this several genres come together, which comes badly and has too many jokes without grace and easy scares but in spite of that in the end it returns to the Insidious essence and rises.If it is true that the jokes that the boys make are bad, that you end up a little fed up with them and that hurts the movie, but when they disappear the movie goes up.The mixture of genres makes it worse, for a moment you think that you will not see one of fear but a thriller, but the film goes back to its origins.Use too many easy scares, which did not use the first one, but in the end it returns to its origin and with it it goes up if well, they do not know how to finish it and the penultimate sequence remains.The actors are not quite right. After the medium of Polstergeist, I can not imagine another medium. They tire me. But the movie does the rest.It has a spectacular picture that puts you squarely in the film, only the picture is already scary. Create a magnificent environmentThe direction I do not like, after Wan making scary movies, seeing another, it's not the same. The rhythm has ups and downs, he does not know how to use the camera. He resorts to easy fright, but in the end he goes back.We will see how the fifth part is, because of course there will be

That was worst of all the insidious series. There was no sense of thriller at all.

After enjoying the first film, you certainly get the impression that the makers of the franchise want to repeat their success. Whilst the second was underwhelming and the third unusual but a little flat, the fourth is an absolute travesty. I was left wondering how it all became so bad. Indeed, some of the recycled elements from previous movies mentioned in other reviews actually appear to make a mockery of the previous movies. It really is like some kind of parody made by amateurs.There was always a danger with continuing Insidious. After all, what made it work were a lot of features from sound to camerawork that were blatantly stolen from other films and rehashed. The jump cuts of the ashen-faced victims of the crime in the house combine 'The Shining' with the well-worn trope of crackling music from the turn of the 20th Century. There was an eerie vitality to it that raised it above the old candle-strewn, trans-dimensional cliches, revived the spirit of the classic 80s 'Poltergeist' and made you care at least a little for the characters. The techniques were strong, the comedy was fresh and unexpected and there were numerous avenues for the narrative to travel along whether exploring an historical tragedy or moving more into the realms of Demonology. However, whilst all the tricks worked nicely in the first one, the second was stale and left me quite puzzled, wondering whether they made a second film when they clearly didn't seem to have a clear direction to take the whole franchise. This is where the more serious questions were raised over whether the series was a case of style over substance.As a fan of some of the Paranormal Activity movies, I felt that they nevertheless flogged it to death when they should have trimmed it down and focused on what worked, rather than rehashing and refocusing just to prolong its shelf-life. But for me, my biggest problem with that series of films was the way that the third one ended but wasn't truly developed in the later films and lost its way. The essence of the storyline therefore became attenuated. With Insidious, the story arc wasn't actually going anywhere to begin with; it's just eating its own tail. The only thing to link it all together is Shaye and one actress alone is a long, long way from making an effective horror franchise. Whilst they re-imagined the ideas in the third Insidious, it nevertheless just didn't really work IMO and felt flat (but with extra marks for effort). Now with the fourth, they are just recycling the already recycled ideas, adding nothing. Shaye can't do much with a lazy script and worn ideas devoid of imagination. There were far cleverer ideas in the 'Nightmare on Elm Street' series than the pitiful 'demon' in this one. Frights? Scares? If you've seen just one horror movie then you'll know what to expect and see it coming a mile off. I really do feel conned and, if I had seen this at the cinema, I would most certainly have walked out.It's worth saying that, as a big fan of horror movies, you notice some films getting reviews that are way too harsh but the low rating is wholly warranted here. I often find that some very good found footage movies are low-rated purely due to a cross-section of the public who regard them all as cheap and lacking credibility as they can't suspend their disbelief on who's holding the camera. Yet some of the ideas within them and the sense of horror in the viewing experience remain raw and effective. This, however, just feels very immaturely written and directed without any imagination. I don't truly know why Shaye attracts so many comments but she was good in the first and really saved #3 in the franchise.Nevertheless, this dog has had its day, maybe two more days than it should have. Now it's begging to be put out of its misery. I don't mean to be rude but if you rate this highly then you clearly haven't seen enough good horror movies to tell the difference between good and bad.