Celebrating 17 Years of Film.Biz.Fans.
by Nigel M Smith
September 12, 2013 10:12 AM
12 Comments
  • |

Patrick Wilson On Why There Won't Be an 'Insidious 3' and His Love for 'Conjuring' Director James Wan

After battling a house full of demons in James Wan's hit summer horror show "The Conjuring," Patrick Wilson is back in theaters this Friday the 13th in Wan's second offering of the year -- only this time he's playing the demon. In the sequel to 2010's hit haunted house horror "Insidious," "Insidious: Chapter 2," Wilson reprises his role as husband and father Josh Lambert, who at the end of the first installment inherited the evil spirit that was plaguing his house. In the second entry, which picks up right where the first one left off, Lambert struggles to contain his inner demon before it overtakes him and kills his family.

Wilson called up Indiewire from Los Angeles to discuss reuniting with Wan for a third time, and whether he would agree to do a third film in the "Insidious" series.



This year you went from playing a demon killer in "The Conjuring" to playing a demon in "Insidious 2." You've come full circle.

[Laughs] That's right. I'll now be investigating myself.

Did you shoot "Insidious: Chapter 2" following "The Conjuring"?

I did. We shot "The Conjuring" a year and a half ago and it was supposed to come out last winter, and it was testing so well that they said, "You know what, let's hold onto it until summer." So the fact that they're both together is strange. I went and did a couple movies in between them, so other than James and the same DP and crew, there's nothing similar. In a strange way, they're sort of complete opposites. "The Conjuring" is a nod to 70's horror, a more classic feel. "Insidious 2" is maybe more closer to the 80's, a little broader, a little bolder, more shocking and ghoulish and melodramatic, which I love, that was part of the fun. We didn't want to retread any of the same ground that we did on the first "Insidious," the script was pretty bold and out there. Which is good, which is what you want to do, swim with the big stick.

What project was more fun for you as an actor? I imagine playing a villain in "Insidious 2" is more of a kick than playing the hero in "The Conjuring."

Well it is, in a sense, but "The Conjuring" is a different beast because I'm playing a real guy, so I wanted to honor that real guy, see how he talks, see what he wore, what he read and what he believed in. It's a whole different set of circumstances. "Insidious 2" is more sort of bold and, not giving too much away, wearing the prosthetics and the violence of it. Not the literal violence, I just mean the abusive power that Josh has. That's exciting, that was sort of in a strange way the payoff for me for the first movie, where you really are the hero and you're trying to save your son. This one's a little darker. But neither one, "Insidious 2" or "The Conjuring," to me they're such different experiences that it's not,"Oh, I enjoyed this more..."

You're not an actor synonymous with the horror genre, so it's a funny coincidence that this year you kind of are. Are you fan of the genre?

You know, I'm not a horror guy. Do I like a really good horror movie? Sure, just like I like a good action movie, a good comedy, a good drama. I'm not well-versed, I don't see every horror movie that comes out. I don't set them on this sort of pedestal where, "Oh, I'm in this genre, I have to act a certain way." I always just go back to the script and the character. And I resisted the temptation. I gotta say, for awhile before I got "Insidious" I got a couple horror movies had gotten thrown my way, but they were just never good scripts, because it was a genre that had gotten, to me so... I mean, let me put it this way, when you think of movies like "The Exorcist" or "Poltergeist," the 70's or early 80's horror movies, to me, were supremely actor-friendly, where these actors got to approach this with great language and material and supernatural elements. That's fun stuff to chew on. I feel like the horror movies going my way were really gimmick-oriented or sex-oriented, like it didn't matter which actor was in the role. That didn't interest me, I wanted something that relied on the actors telling the story.

You might also like:

12 Comments

  • briana | February 23, 2014 5:46 PMReply

    if they dont make a third, i wont be upset because the second ended really great. on the contrary , if they make a third i definetley will check it out, have a LOT of faith in the people who started the insidious chapters. :)

  • Asia | December 16, 2013 1:44 PMReply

    clearly there's going to be a three, and that's exciting ! I love this directors work. he's the king of cliff hanging and making movies that have several parts. I feel like saw could've kept going if he really wanted too lol. it's like he never stops! Anyways I agree, the lamberts shouldn't be brought up again, but I'm super interested in this new family. the character Alex was clearly haunted by our malicious insidious demon from the first insidious movie. Get ready to here tiptoe through the tulips again folks! that's just my guess. April 3, 2015 is the release date. Can't wait!

  • WOOHOO | September 18, 2013 10:02 AMReply

    I'm pretty sure there will be a sequel. The ending is already begging for it. There's no way that James Wan ended the series like that and there's no way that he "doesn't have a clue on where the story goes now" for the sequel if Insidious 2 ended like that. It'll be SO disappointing if he leaves us with such a huge cliffhanger T.T

  • andrew | September 15, 2013 11:08 PMReply

    after seeing number two i would be very disappointed if they didn't make a number three. i agree, josh's family probably won't be involved anymore, and that's fine. i feel like the insistence to wrap up the story line from the first movie totally derailed the eerie fun from the insidious world. there are so many other stories to tell with the other characters! bring back the artsy, well timed, creepiness from the first--the tiny tim song, the great shooting techniques and well established shots--more more more!

  • Joel | September 15, 2013 7:20 PMReply

    so to be clear, he did not say "there's no insidious chapter 3" because, there obviously will be. he just said that Josh won't be in it, which I'm okay with. his story is over.

  • makenna | September 15, 2013 4:05 PMReply

    please make a chapter 3! In the end of chapter 2. Elise looked behind that girl at the end of the movie and started say oh my god a lot and then it ended so she saw something so you need to make another one because you are going to leave a lot of people confused at the end of chapter 2. So please listen to me and im probably not the only person who thinks this.

  • Sabrina Guzman | September 15, 2013 1:15 PMReply

    Both of those movies were great ! I loved The Conjuring it gave me a rush ! So did Insidious chapter 2 I saw it last night it was good but The Conjuring was better (:

  • Joe | September 15, 2013 12:20 PMReply

    Obviously if they called it Chapter 2 there's going to be more chapters. Plus, the movie has a biggest cliff hanger then the first one, there's little doubt in my mind that tere won't be a Chapter 3

  • Mish | September 14, 2013 6:43 AMReply

    The way Chapter 2 ended, Chapter 3 makes perfect sense. They can think of something, this series is too good to just end it right here especially since it ended the way it did...

  • Kevin | September 14, 2013 6:18 AMReply

    There will be an insidious 3 trust me just saw insidious 2 it was great

  • Joe | September 12, 2013 11:31 AMReply

    "swim with the big stick?"

  • D | September 12, 2013 10:34 PM

    Pretty sure Wilson probably said "swing."