Mike Flanagan Hated The Title Ouija: Origin Of Evil

Contrary to early experiences describing it as a sequel, “Ouija: Origin of Evil” is definitely a prequel set within the late Nineteen Sixties (practically 50 years earlier than the occasions of “Ouija”). Mike Flanagan actually took the interval setting to coronary heart, too. In addition to opening the movie with the crackly classic emblem that Universal Pictures used from 1963-1990, Flanagan informed Esquire in 2016 that he and his frequent cinematographer, Michael Fimognari, filmed “Origin of Evil” with “antique lenses” and averted trendy expertise like Steadicams. Instead, they restricted themselves to methods generally employed within the ’60s and early ’70s, creating suspense with zooms and split-diopter pictures (see the picture above).

After going all-out to make “Origin of Evil” greater than a creatively-bankrupt try to launch a “Ouija” franchise, you may think about how Flanagan felt when he discovered what Universal wished to name it. He revealed how Blumhouse head Jason Blum broke the information to him in a submit on his Tumblr:

I keep in mind the telephone name I received from Blum after the film was finished. Universal had determined that they would not name the film “Ouija 2” in spite of everything, they had been anxious in regards to the quantity 2 making it really feel much less attention-grabbing. Instead, they’d taken an enormous swing: the film can be known as “Ouija: Origin of Evil.”

I laughed out loud. I believed he was kidding. When it grew to become apparent that he wasn’t, I filed a protest. “It’s not very good,” I stated. “It’s cheesy. And not to put too fine a point on it, but the movie depicts neither the origin of the Ouija board, or of — um — Evil.”

Blum’s response? “Buddy, the title tested well. That’s the way the cookie crumbles. Trust us, if the studio says it’s ‘Origin of Evil,’ it’s ‘Origin of Evil.'”

Leave a Comment