Editorials
Can ‘Insidious: Chapter 3’ Course-Correct The Franchise?
When Insidious was released back in 2011, it marked the resurgence of low budget horror after a decade of big budget remakes and other (lazy) major studio horror films. The film was such a success (both critically and commercially), that a sequel was inevitable. Unfortunately, Insidious: Chapter 2 was not greeted with the same accolades that its predecessor received.With Insidious: Chapter 3 coming out this weekend, we thought it might be worth discussing whether or not it’s possible for the prequel to fix where the first sequel went wrong.
Insidious is one of my favorite horror films so far this decade, and I never expected it to be. At the time of its release, PG-13 horror didn’t inspire much confidence (and still doesn’t), and James Wan wasn’t as much of a household name as he is now. Yes, he made a name for himself with Saw, but after a few duds like Dead Silence and Death Sentence, Wan was not the hot name he once was. Once I finally saw it, I was blown away.
I know people have a lot of issues with the final act of the film, but as I’ve mentioned before, I kind of love it. The film was terrifying (don’t even tell me you didn’t get scared by that lipstick-faced demon) and heartfelt, while being grounded by the performances of Lin Shaye, Rose Byrne (whom I absolutely love), Patrick Wilson and Barbara Hershey. Hell, even the child actors were great! It also subverted many of the haunted house genre expectations (they actually move to a new house!).
Two years later, Insidious: Chapter 2 was released. It still made a healthy profit, but it was bashed by critics and audience members alike. While it isn’t necessarily the sequel I wanted, I don’t hate it like so many other people seem to. It is certainly not as good as the first one, mostly because there aren’t any surprises. It’s just another case of “more of the same.” Also, all of the character’s are pretty stupid for not realizing the Patrick Wilson character is possessed immediately at the start of the film.
My main gripe with the film isn’t the direction the plot took the “Black Bride” character, but more so with the fact that the tone of the film seemed to drastically change. It was a sillier film, and this was due to the overabundance of the Specs and Tucker characters, both of whom I actually like, in small doses. Also, the heart that was present in the first film seemed to be missing from Chapter 2.
Now we have Insidious: Chapter 3 being released this weekend, and I’m worried, but hopeful. It’s a prequel, which I’m usually not a fan of (I don’t care about backstory; I want to see the franchise’s plot move forward), but since the series kind of screwed itself by killing off Shaye in the end of the first film, a prequel makes sense. Her cameo in Chapter 2 felt awkward.
Add to that the fact that the Lambert family is (supposedly) no longer involved, James Wan is no longer directing (though if it had to be anyone, I’m glad Leigh Whannell was his replacement) and I’m not sure what to think of this film. As I mentioned earlier, Insidious had plenty of scares and a lot of heart, both of which were things missing from Chapter 2. The best thing Chapter 3 could do is reinfuse those things back into the story.
I’m not trying to be a Negative Nancy here at all, and I certainly am not asking for the backlash I received when discussing the X-Files reboot (though all opinions are welcome in the comments below). I want this film to instill in me the excitement I felt when I left the theater from watching the first film (twice). I just think it’s important for the filmmakers to remember what made the first Insidious so good in the first place. Chapter 2 felt rushed and a little bit lazy. I don’t want that for this film.
If the goal is to have each sequel be a standalone(ish) film following a different demon-hunting expedition of Elise, Specs and Tucker, then I suppose it could be interesting (though it doesn’t sound like it). I’m not really sure where I want the franchise to go, but I hope Chapter 3 sets it back on the right track (at least tonally).
Of course, it’s too late now for them to change anything about the film, but I’m interested to know what you think. Are you excited for Chapter 3? Or did Chapter 2 leave such a bad taste in your mouth that you’ve given up on the franchise? Let me know in the comments below!
Judging from the unprecedented box office success of Kane Parsons’ Backrooms adaptation, you’ve likely already seen the liminal horror hit that managed to make audiences afraid of empty hallways and bad wallpaper. And now that so many of us have already entered the yellow labyrinth (some of us more than once), the time has come to discuss the spoiler-filled details that make the movie so fascinating in the first place.
And if there’s one element here that makes the Backrooms movie stand out from any previous lore/mythology, it has to be the genius addition of the Still Life entities. Warped recreations of real people that somehow wandered into the Complex, these misremembered creatures are responsible for some of the most disturbing imagery of 2026 – as well as laugh-out-loud memes created by one of the film’s very own concept artists.
However, true to Parsons’ word that the movie would rely heavily on practical effects, each of these distorted monsters was brought to life by real actors under heavy layers of makeup and prosthetics (with the occasional splash of CGI enhancements). While Anora and If I Had Legs I’d Kick You actress Ivy Wolk wasn’t among these performers, despite what Letterboxd might have you believe, the creature cast did benefit from veteran players with plenty of genre experience.
For starters, Alien: Romulus alumni Robert Bobroczkyi (who previously brought that film’s horrific Offspring to life during its most memorable sequence) plays the flick’s main antagonist, the Still Life version of Captain Clark. And though there was some obvious CGI involved in making the character’s peg-leg and nightmarish face more believable, Bobroczkyi’s monstrous performance and his natural 7’7″ frame helped to make that final chase sequence a clear highlight among this year’s genre offerings.
The film’s Texas-Chain-Saw-inspired “dinner” scene also features a freaky collection of less-aggressive Still Life creatures in the form of the Bearded Man, the Red-Headed Woman and, strangest of them all, the cheekily named “Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life” (who earned this title among fans and crewmembers as a reference to his apparent affinity for lamps).
While this was the first major horror outing for both Patrick Baynham (The Bearded Man) and Dana Mahmood (Archibald), Rhiannon Roberts has worked as a stunt performer in everything from Yellowjackets to HBO’s The Last of Us adaptation – which is probably why The Red-Headed Woman is the most active out of Clark’s impromptu “family.” That being said, the Archibald Leland Sutter Still Life is my personal favorite of the bunch simply because his anachronistic outfit suggests that the Backrooms phenomenon might be a lot older than the Async Foundation. I also love how hard he tries to be helpful with that little light of his!
That might be it for the Still Life entities, but I think horror fans will also be pleased to hear that the film’s Found Footage prologue stars none other than Resident Evil: Welcome to Raccoon City star Avan Jogia as Naren Warne – and American Mary herself Katharine Isabelle also shows up in a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo at Mary’s house party towards the middle of the story (though I have a feeling that she originally had a bigger part that was likely cut for time).
At the end of the day, Parsons’ Backrooms may have been an auteur-driven project motivated by the young director’s unique take on the classic creepypasta, but film has always been a collective artform, so it’s fun to see just how many talented performers it takes to bring this kind of supernatural nightmare to life in a way that connects with so many people.
You must be logged in to post a comment.