I've been quite upfront in the past about my affinity for the "Insidious" film franchise. The brainchild of horror maestros James Wan and Leigh Whannell, this low-budget series has made frequent and effective uses of old-school creeps, as it wowed audiences with its tales of ghostly hauntings and supernatural perils. And through three very solid installments, it began to seem like a series that could do no wrong. But alas, the fourth chapter arrived, and while it was a big hit... it's left fans pretty evenly divided right down the center. Some adore it, some detest it.And me? Well, I'm pretty much split right down the center myself. Director Adam Robitel's "Insidious: The Last Key" is by no means a particularly bad film. It has likable characters, continues the strong atmosphere established in prior films, and is frequently eerie and entertaining in all the ways you've come to expect of the "Insidious" franchise. But something about it just... doesn't feel right. It's a film that very much feels set to auto-pilot. Repeating similar themes and tropes we've already seen while adding little new to the formula.Sometime shortly before the events of the original film, psychic Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) is called upon to investigate troubling occurrences in a young man's (Kirk Acevedo) home. Trouble is... his house is in fact Elise's childhood home, which she fled decades prior after a childhood of misery and woe. After reconnecting with her extended family (Bruce Davison, Spencer Locke, Caitlin Gerard), Elise and her associates (writer Whannell, Angus Sampson) set out to solve the mystery... only to realize that not only is there a supernatural threat they must conquer... but that there may be another threat in the world of the living that is all too real...Director Robitel is a fine replacement for Wan and Whannell, whom handled directorial duties in the previous three films. Robitel's wonderfully inky palette and sense of flow makes many of the scares fantastically effective, and his great sense of pace helps the film feel urgent and fast, but never to a distracting point. This is aided by the sharp cinematography and returning composer Joseph Bishara's haunting themes. From a production standpoint, the film is top-notch, and I'd definitely be open to seeing Robitel return for future installments.And as has been the case in virtually every installment, the cast is quite good and aids in endearing the film to the audience. Shaye is an absolute joy, and it's wonderful to see such a great actress finally given a defining role to sink her teeth into. Whannell and Sampson are charming, good fun as always as the film's comedic duo of Specs and Tucker. And I quite liked the additions of Davison, Locke and Gerard as Elise's brother and nieces, even if they aren't given much to do. And in fact, that's the big problem here- there's not much to do for anyone in this film. Or at least nothing new for anyone to do. The movie toys with new concepts and ideas, but often doesn't deliver on them, instead doubling back onto notions and plot-points brought up in prior films, rinsing and repeating them over and over. And it makes some of the new ideas feel shallow and more akin bland sequel bait than anything else. Case in point is Gerard's character Imogen- the film establishes early on that she may indeed share the same abilities as her aunt Elise, and yet outside of only one or two brief instances, the film does nothing with this. Same goes for the plot, which is based heavily on Elise's family and how she's lost her connections to them. The movie does a good job setting this up... but instead of delivering on it, it often throws it aside for references to prior films or more meandering scenes of the characters encountering ghosts in the supernatural otherworld.It just drags the movie down too often, leaving the film feeling like it has an identity crisis. It never feels like a proper fourth film... it feels more like an extended series of vignettes designed to tie it into the series' overall mythology. It's not so much a new chapter as it is a collection of footnotes. And even then, they aren't particularly interesting footnotes.Still, thanks to its stellar cast, grand atmosphere and a mildly intriguing story, I'd say "Insidious: The Last Key" is worth seeing, provided you're a fan of the series. It won't win over new converts, but it does just enough right to make it worth a go for those who have followed this franchise from the beginning. Let's just hope that the inevitable fifth film corrects the course. I give "The Last Key" an about-average 6 out of 10. Definitely the weakest installment, but still worth seeing.

I must admit that I was not overly excited to get to sit down to watch "Insidious: The Last Key", as the franchise has become rather mundane and just churning out one generic movie after another.However it turned out that "Insidious: The Last Key" was actually quite entertaining. I especially enjoyed the backstory for Elize. But also the story of her father, as that was quite a surprise.They had great special effects and the entity that haunted the house was actually looking quite interesting, just a shame that it wasn't utilized more efficiently.The cast in the movie was good and people performed quite well to carry the movie. Lin Shaye was, of course as always, the carrying and focal point of the movie. But she was helped along quite nicely by both Leigh Whannell and Angus Sampson. It was nice to see Bruce Davison pop up in a movie such as this.This wasn't an overly scary movie though, which in fact hasn't been the trademark of the "Insidious" series after all. But all in all, an entertaining movie and definitely a movie you should see if you enjoy this series of movies.

Insidious: The Last Key might be another cash-cow horror film, but it goes back to its original roots, making it an excellent addition to the franchise.

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.