It scared up more than $40 million at the box office, so there’s a chance that almost everyone in town watched it.
Love it or hate it, it did have it’s share of jumps and uneasy feelings throughout and was by no means a bad movie.
The only time I didn’t buy the scares was when they showed the ghosts, or demons I should say.
I prefer to scare myself with images of what I think is running around scaring the bejeezus out of the family instead of actually seeing it.
And they are currently writing a sequel.
There are a lot of people calling foul right now, but just listen.
We’re brought up to believe that every time we get the words “Based on true events” or “Based on a true story” that it means it really happened and that the filmmakers wouldn’t dare lie to us.
Well, perhaps I’ll just note that “Texas Chain Saw Massacre” didn’t really happen.
It’s based on the “true events” of Ed Gein, who dismembered his victims and reportedly ate them and made clothes and furniture out of their skin and bones.
Hannibal Lecter, of “Silence of the Lambs” fame, is based off the same guy.
And none of it happened in Texas.
Now, films like “The Amityville Horror” are based on “true events,” but even then the true story is a bit murky and leaves a lot to the imagination.
Or sometimes you don’t even need the words “based on a true story.” All you need is the opening scrawl of the explanation of what happened like “The Blair Witch Project” and that the footage was found later, discarded, and the filmmakers or family have vanished.
However, everything in “The Conjuring” is at least based on fact and “true events,” though they are smudged a bit but true nonetheless. We’re watching a movie not a documentary.
You know that creepy looking doll at the beginning of “The Conjuring” that you thought no one in their right mind would have lying around their house?
Well, you were right. The doll looked nothing like the one in the film. It’s actually just a Raggedy-Ann doll. But one possessed by a demon, mind you.
And that room where the Warren family keeps all their accursed items? That’s real, too. Heck, you can even take a tour of it if you’re in New England.
If you’re not brave enough, you can just check out the video at www.warrens.net. But even that’s a bit creepy.
So, back to “The Conjuring” part II. It’s actually possible since the husband and wife paranormal investigators, Ed and Lorraine Warren, have supposedly investigated more than 10,000 hauntings during their career.
That’s a lot of movies.
They were also the first ones to investigate the Amityville haunting made famous in the “Amityville Horror” films.
And if you’re keeping track, another film, “The Haunting in Connecticut,” was loosely based on the 1986 Snedeker haunting investigated by, you guessed it, the Warrens.
“True events” horror movies are meant to entertain or, as point in fact, frighten you. But there is something very interesting that you get from these movies that are based on “true events.” You get to investigate the real stories and find out what really happened.
The moviemakers show you what they want you to see and tell you what’s scary. But sometimes just a little digging on the Internet can lead you to more frightening occurrences, like the deer hunter who stumbled upon a satanic idol in the middle of the woods. He immediately became frightened by it and fled, only to run across a man dressed in all black with white hair and a white beard. He appeared next to the man and began walking with him.
Or just ask your parents or grandparents. I’m sure they’re chock-full of stories of the occult and scary stories about Mexican folklore.
I mean, they’re family... why would they lie?
Just like the movies, all their stories may be “based on true events,” but that doesn’t mean that’s what actually happened.
“The Conjuring” is showing at the Rio 6 Cinemas, 806 E. Houston St. in Beeville.
Paul Gonzales is the entertainment writer at the Bee-Picayune and can be reached at 358-2550, ext. 116, or at thescene@mySouTex.com.