La Llorona makes her long awaited “Conjuring Universe" debut in Michael Chaves stylistic, yet underwhelming, “The Curse of La Llorona.”
The “Conjuring Universe” has been a blessing for the horror genre. James Wan’s “The Conjuring” is often considered a contemporary masterpiece of horror. The “Annabelle” spinoffs are a lesser but still competently crafted horror experience.
The ever-expanding “Conjuring Universe” has experienced a dip in form with its last few entries. The formula that proved to a be a resounding success in the first two “Conjuring” movies has been recycled through each entry and now is at its predictable low in Chaves' latest entry.
“The Curse of La Llorona” begins by delving into the mythology of Mexico’s most famous bogeywoman. A young beautiful women falls for a nobleman in the Mexican countryside, and have two children together.
A few years into their marriage she discovers that he is seeing a younger woman, and in a fit of manic grief, she drowns her two children. The stage is set for La Llorona (Marisol Ramirez) to terrorize mothers in 1970s Los Angeles, where we meet Anna Garcia (Linda Cardellini) and her two children.
From the opening five minutes it was evident that Chaves has a talent for stylistic storytelling. The camera movement was immersive and energetic; everything indicated that this would be the “Conjuring Universes” rebound after Corin Hardy’s “The Nun.”
The promise was however short-lived, for the quality of the script soon overshadowed Chaves talent behind the camera. The dialogue was stiff and delivered through seemingly gritted teeth by the actors. It was difficult to invest in the story when the story was stiff and suffered from jarring shifts in quality.
Back in 1973 Los Angeles, Anna Garcia is a social worker who is assigned a case where a mother, Patricia Alvarez (Patricia Velasquez), has hidden her children within the house. Garcia discovers the children inside a locked closet and assumes the worst.
Once in protective custody and without the protection of their mother, they fall victim to La Llorona. In her grief, the mother prays for La Llorona to seek out Garcia’s children. La Llorona answers and two hours of predictable, and uninspired, jump scares ensue.
The fault of movie is not in the iconic character, nor even the questionable acting, but the screenwriting. The atmosphere that the first two “Conjuring” entries developed was lost to the screenwriters affinity for cheap attempts at thrills.
There are a few genuine jump scares when La Llorona is first pursuing Garcia’s children, but after the next dozen, which happen in a frenzied succession, the audience was numb to it.
There is also the question of where La Llorona fits into the franchise. The lone connection is in Father Perez (Tony Amendola), who briefly mentions his involvement with Annabelle, but it is brief and is lost to anyone who is not already familiar with the universe.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
Amendola is enjoyable as a wise, but weary, Father Perez. He is sorely underused as a connection to the other entries.
The lone light of the movie is found in Cardellini’s earnest attempt at bringing life to her character. Her talent is undeniable, and even a stale script had difficulty denying her screen presence.
“The Curse of La Llorona” should have been a resounding success for the horror genre, considering the prolific lore behind the character, but stale screenwriting matched with stiff acting ensured that this is a forgettable entry in the fading, “Conjuring Universe.”
Justin Schatz is a freelance reporter and photographer for the Daily Lobo. He can be contacted by email at culture@dailylobo.com or on Twitter @JustinSchatz10.
