The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund (2016) User Reviews

Add another one to the pile

[manuelasaez · 2/10 · 10 March 2016]

I try, I really do, to give these movies the benefit of the doubt. Even despite some amateurish direction, some downright sophomoric cinematography, and some horrendous acting, I try to give these movies some credit. But when you fall on the same overused, clichéd, asinine tropes found in all demonic possession films, you have to ask yourself, why do these people bother? This movie does not even attempt to do anything even remotely clever with the premise, and from the onset, you can already see what the entirety of the movie will cover. Girl is possessed, priests get "clearance" to perform exorcism, demon possesses the priests, rinse and repeat. I mean, I has been done AD NAUSEUM, to the point were I wonder what this creative team was trying to accomplish, and I have several questions;

1. Why is it always a Catholic priest that is called in? There are other religious denominations that perform exorcisms, and don't need permission to do so. At this point, it's imperative that this trope is removed, as it adds nothing to genre that The Exorcist didn't already accomplish.

2. Second, why are the special effects so shoddily done? Did you not allocate the proper funds to create believable effects? When you make a movie that requires a good use of SFX, make sure that the budget is there before you even start filming. Do not skimp out on them in order to pay your cast.

3. Lastly, why didn't anyone ask themselves, "What is this movie doing that every demonic possession film before it has not already done?" If your answer is, "nothing", as I'm sure it was, you have to re-evaluate the use of your creativity.

Stop wasting your time making these films that don't enhance or further the sub-genre. At this point, it's just embarrassing. I have no faith in the sub-genre anymore, and it's due to movies like this. To the people responsible, your efforts are worthless and do not deserve to be seen by anyone. A complete and utter failure in every sense of the word.

Credits are ridiculous

[melissatourigny · 3/10 · 12 October 2020]

The 8 minutes of opening credits is absolutely ridiculous. Such a slow start to what could possibly be a good movie.

Nothing new

[baggybear · 3/10 · 20 October 2021]

Anna is not screaming because she is possessed by a demon , she screams in agony how bad this actually is - same story as usual but perhaps more boring , bad acting , and very stupid - it feels like a bunch of kids hade made this.

Home of the devil

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 22 September 2018]

Was drawn into seeing 'The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund', with a cool poster/cover, a somewhat intriguing if very derivative premise and as someone with a general appreciation for the genre it fits under. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there (though there are decent to good ones as well), made me though apprehensive.

It is sadly however yet another film seen recently, hence some reiteration because the exact same strengths and flaws present in those films are here, that to me was incredibly disappointing considering its potential which it doesn't do anywhere near enough with. 'The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund' is really quite abominable, with so many huge flaws and doesn't do anything with any potential it had. There is nothing good here in 'The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund', just amateur hour all round.

Going on to the negatives, the story does feel over-stretched and some of it comes over as vague and under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less unsettled and never gaining momentum. All the characters are too sketchy and with cardboard thin and colourless personalities and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their annoying and illogical decision making and behaviours frustrates. The chemistry is bland and unfocused.

The sound quality is obvious and utilised cheaply (being too loud in the build ups and people's reactions), the effects are shoddy and all of the acting is lacking severely on the whole, that's actually an understatement as the worst of it is horrendous. Lee Bane is at his hammiest and it is not fun to watch. There is no sense of horror or engagement with the awful predicament they're in, and no connecting with the character, it just reeks of indifference which makes the viewer not care less too.

Dialogue can be stilted and rambling while the pace and film drags on forever, apparent from the very start, never recovering that interest is lost fast. The ending has no build-up and just ends ridiculously. Found too many of the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness, a lot of dumb and vague moments and explanations and the lack of tension and suspense. Thrills are none, thanks to stodginess and excessive over-familiarity, and found myself never invested in the drama, which tended to be indifferently acted, interminably paced and statically directed.

A lot of 'The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund' has really dull and going nowhere plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations, while too many of the things to make you shocked are far from creative or unsettling. It all feels rather tame while the threat completely lacks menace and looks terrible.

Nothing freaky or interesting, no development and too derivative, while everything is unimaginative and are more odd than scary, completely failing to show any sense of dread. There is nothing interesting or illuminating with what the film was trying to do and the drama is overwrought with no momentum and a lot of weirdness. The direction is barely there and disorganised and the music is ill-fitting. 'The Exorcism of Anna Ecklund' is very amateurish visually, too drearily lit and shows no care in the way it's shot. The editing has more continuity errors than one can count.

Altogether, irredeemably terrible. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Waste of time

[A-I-Shah · 1/10 · 25 November 2018]

It was the worst hour and something spent on a movie, some parts are not connected to the others. As if they wanted to add the parts and that's it! A hell of a bad movie

Worse than the whole Sharktopus franchise.

[zainsev · 1/10 · 20 July 2018]

This is the most unconvincing horror movie I've ever seen. Worst of it is that you had to wait for 10 agonizing minutes of opening credits with the supposed Anna DANCING like an insane crackhead trying to imitate a real demonic possession. What also gave it away was the embarrassing lines like "You want to f**k me, don't you?" "F**k you, you c********r." "Bitch." "F**k me, f**k me, f**k me." and many I don't really care to mention. It was like a 7 year old who just learned all the curse words was trying to be edgy and make a movie. It had potentials but sadly, the acting was horrible, the plot was weak, and if this was really based on true events, I feel really bad for the actual people involved in the event. I'm not religious but this is downright insulting.

Tragic

[tcharito · 1/10 · 25 February 2019]

Who ever payed to film this? One of the worst even in fast forward.

SATAN IS AMONG US....BLAH BLAH BLAH.

[nogodnomasters · 1/10 · 28 April 2018]

Contains plot spoilers, although for some strange reason exorcism movies all have the same plot.

In the opening we are explained Passover, as read, and are then subjected to seven minutes of credits with church organ music as Anna (Tiffany Ceri) makes slow motion snarly faces at the camera. Knowing this is the scene the director wanted, I dared to watch on as we discover Anna was once possessed at 14 (what kid isn't) and this is a repossession (minus Linda Blair), with a demon seven times that of a normal immortal demon.

Anna of course is Catholic, the favorite of Mr. "S" himself and is going to be exorcised by Father Richard (Lee Bane) an atheist priest with his own "demons" sort of speak. During this time we get the Cliffs Note version of the theology of both "The Exorcist I and II." Every time Anna moves her neck from side to side we hear bones crack as if moving your head from left to right is somehow unnatural. Perhaps the worst aspect of the film was the soundtrack at the end during the various closing possession scenes as we hear what sounds like a muffled lawn mower getting louder and softer. Granted Ave Satani has been overdone, but it always works.

Tiffany Ceri has not mastered the sinister possessed laugh. It was funny to watch her do it. Her friend Laura (Melissa Bayern) was given terrible lines that neither she nor the director knew what to do with them.

Anna does the whole potty mouth scene but stops short at sex or nudity. Heck, not even a decent up skirt.

Decidedly un-spooky film with too much déjà vu

[amalgamoth · 1/10 · 4 April 2017]

So, we've had the Exorcism of Emily Rose, the Exorcism of Molly Hartley, and now there's the Exorcism of Anna Ecklund. Next year we'll probably have the Exorcism of Judy Jones and in 2019 we'll have Jenny Smith. For me, the main reason to check out this kind of films is to see whether there is anything new or innovating to be found in the special effects department. Anna Ecklund is definitely not where to find it. It's really *spoiler alert*

the same old: Pretty white girl in a white night gown squirming on a bed, all milky-eyed and grinning like a goblin. It's all been done several times before, and to think this is a recent film is hard to believe. It could have been produced like this twenty years ago, and still it wouldn't be that scary. Worse even in my view is the general daftness of the characters, pretty much all of them. The priests exchange dialogue in an near-whisper in order to appear deeply earnest and profound, whereas the content of said dialogue has little substance or something remotely intriguing. The nuns are the epitome of stupidity, often just standing around sheepishly, as mere easy targets for the subject. They're just there to suggest a monastery setting, but apart from being dressed in habits they're pretty much useless, looking scared and paralysed like a hare in a car's headlights. As for the main subject: She's more entertaining as a faint Regan derivative (Regan being 7 times scarier though), but once healed from her possessive state she is in turn taken over by her own dull, bland and childish personality. To be honest, she's sexier with a demon inside (with some gratuitous dirty talk). I think I'll leave it at that, but within a few days after writing this I'll probably have forgotten I've seen "Anna Ecklund". I think "Emily Rose" was better. In order to keep this genre somewhat interesting, one has to either venture into new territory (script-wise), or look again at what was right about The Exorcist and what was wrong about its follow-ups.

The story is depicted script not the real event

[oropezamark · 1/10 · 25 July 2016]

I have seen This Movies with eye catching labels, based on the true story. But beforehand, I had read and clearly have a precise background of this event that happen in Earling, Iowa sometime in 1928. I expect how thrilling and hair-lifting the movies will be. The real story in Earling is a scariest one. But this movie seems to deprive the real event, with poor amateurish acting, daunting effects is a low budget film. The director must realize that the center of the character is Anna, and not to the priest. Perhaps the remake of this film can be good if all the scariest events is included in the making, like 3 weeks of performing rituals with exchange of dialogue between the priest and the devil. The levitation and transformation of Anna into horrible ogre, notice that Anna's lip is closed while doing a conversation, the accident of the priest, and the pest that rampage in Earling opting to the pronouncement of the villagers to move the rituals to the other place, the revelation of the devil how Anna became possessed, and lastly, the appearance of Lucifer and Belzebuub in the corner after successful exorcism, and the conversation of the priest and Lucifer as ending chapter. This 2016 version of Anna is not based on the true story, it does not happen that the devil moved to the priest and the nuns after exorcism. Sadly, the making is crap and need a remake that really based on the real story, not to the depicted one.

Worth a look... Not every movie is the next 'Citizen Kane'

[paulrainwater · 6/10 · 1 April 2016]

Decent film and worth a look, especially if you read something about the true story. I think a lot of comments condemning the film are overly critical, it is what it is, a lower budget film but not without some good qualities. Not every film is going to win awards and be another 'Citizen Kane'. This was a decent effort and I get tired of reading scathing reviews from arm chair wanta be directors who think they're the next Alfred Hitchcock...

Not all of the following is in the film but most of it is, these are some excerpts from this terrifying true story, some of the more intense paranormal phenomena that occurred during this 23 day long exorcism were: Anna exhibited inhuman strength, required sometimes up to six "athletic" nuns to hold her down. Anna levitated, completely off the ground, on more than one occasion. Anna leapt from her bed in the 'lying down'position, ONTO the wall above the door, where she held on, and maintained her position of crouching, apparently defying gravity, while holding on to the side of a wall. While Anna was unconscious, voices would talk, blaspheme, and verbally assault everyone present, but not through Anna's mouth, they came from her throat, but her lips never moved. She vomited, spit, drooled, urinated and defecated inhuman amounts/quantities of solids and fluids. It was reported that Anna was urinating buckets worth of liquid, and this is at a time where she was not eating hardly anything at all daily.

Waste of time

[marcooleo · 1/10 · 12 December 2018]

This is the worst movie i ever seen containing an exorcism. The acting were so bad, and the effects aswell, so i believe anyone could make this movie by themselves at home.

Nothing beyond the familiar.

[parry_na · 5/10 · 1 March 2018]

Something that has dogged the prolific horror stable of Andrew Jones is occasional lapses in sound quality. That is an affliction that blights this otherwise enjoyable exorcist tale. Such are the mumblings of actors Lee Bane and Jeff Raggett that you can barely hear what they are saying, and this kind of problem drains many of the scenes of any impact they might have. When the (very) familiar profanities from the demonic influence are similarly obscured, this proves more than an annoyance.

Otherwise, writer/director Jones does what always does: turns in a perfectly serviceable slow-burner that dwells on intimate, low-key scenes rather than spectacular theatrics, and puts his own stamp on the 'possession' genre.

Tiffany Ceri is excellent as the titular character. An unusual departure for a story dealing with demonic possession is that we only get to see her once she under the influence of evil - even the very long opening credits are interspersed with images of her writhing on a convent bed - so we lose the effective build-up of terror as she goes deeper under the evil spell. But there's a reason for that, and even I won't give away that spoiler. Lee Bane gives one of his better performance here, restrained and reflective, as the uncertain Father Richard Lamont. Jeff Raggett plays the reassuring Father Theo Reisinger with calm authority.

All in all, another competent production from Jones' North Bank Entertainment company. Is it frightening? Despite all the wailing and gnashing, no. The enhancements of milky contact lenses and modulating voices to sound like a kazoo go through the motions, rather than effectively scaring us, much like the venture itself. It is 'Andrew Jones does The Exorcist' which is playful and entertaining in an economic way, but doesn't go beyond the familiar.

Don't do it.

[stineolsen · 1/10 · 29 December 2021]

7 minuts of screaming in slow motion.

Why..... and i thought that was the worst part.. But then... they started acting.. and its the same as every other exorcism movie - but "anna" acts like a dramatic preteen with casting her body around in bed..

i would rather pull my own skin off that watching this movie again, +

Generalizing the work

[bielcorrealira · 2/10 · 9 January 2023]

In terms of image quality with good capture angles, the film was average compared to the others of its same generation of resources. However, his idea of proposing an exorcist horror brought us a very weak script with little creativity in his construction of scenes and elements. Left something to be desired.

Running away from a frame-by-frame analysis, the delivery of suspense they brought gave me an interpretive tasting with a very cliché flavor. Films that want to work in this type of genre demand a lot of dedication on the part of the construction of the script, as well as the visual. We perceive a usual terror of possession style "The Exorcist" of the 70's without taking anything away. If it's to be spent on a production whose final product is an allusion to a work from 50 years ago, it's money wasted. Surely they could have "given blood" to deliver an innovative terror in the field of horror!

A hour wasted!

[horrorwriter-32766 · 1/10 · 30 May 2021]

I really wanted to give this movie a chance because I love Exorcism films, but this..crap of a movie, wasted my valuable time. The long opening credits was not needed, and the acting was just as terrible. I just let the movie play in the background while I did something else with my time. Plus, I felt like the opening credits kinda spoiled the whole movie.

Wrong

[angelaphillips-80914 · 1/10 · 12 April 2021]

Historically incorrect, Jacob is her father IRL not her husband that's the first sign of it being a bad film. The location is incorrect, the permissions for the exorcism is portrayed incorrectly, the time period is incorrect (which I could have overlooked, if any of the above would have been correct) this is a waste of time not just because of how inaccurate it is, but because the acting is terrible, the production is terrible and it's so below amature.

Poor movie with an annoying start.

[maodsrj · 1/10 · 18 September 2022]

The character's opening scene is very long and annoying. This has already derailed any sense of positive criticism of the film. Maybe if they had shortened that scene the movie would have been rated better, even though it was pretty weak. A lesson for producers and directors never to repeat such a gross mistake.

I believe the intention was to leave viewers agonized by the demonic interpretation of the lectern. But it was a shot in the foot.

The acting of the actors in general is weak, the script also does not contribute much to an interesting end. I was almost exorbited with so much anger from this movie, but in the end I survived.

STUPID!!!!

[africe · 1/10 · 16 May 2021]

This movie is so bad I only made it to the 30 minute mark. I wasn't about to waste another hour of my life to this idiotic film. Bad acting, bad writing, hell, bad everything!!! DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME!

Better than expected

[jh-90996 · 7/10 · 11 March 2016]

Most exorcism films have the same things in them that have been pretty over done so I'm not going to complain about the not so original plot points. Studios have been making films like this for ages and they all have similar stuff. I didn't go into this with any great expectations and I found it to be better than I thought it would be. The acting is really good from the possessed girl and the story for the most part kept me interested especially from the exorcism scene on. The best part for me is the final 15 minutes of the film where they add more action. The film won't be for everyone but personally I found it entertaining and even enjoyable. exorcism and demon nuns are enough to make a film entertaining in my book.

Overly familiar but still watchable exorcism effort

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 7/10 · 13 October 2021]

Approaching an old priest friend of his, a man convinces him that his wife has become possessed once again and needs another exorcism, forcing the priest to turn to a doubting colleague to follow him to the asylum where she's being held and exorcise her before its too late.

This was an underwhelming if still somewhat watchable genre effort. Among the most obvious flaws featured here are the utmost cliche setups that come about in just about every genre feature. The doubting priest who questions his faith and finally comes back to see the light is so common it's an insult, and the confines of the exorcism itself falling into the usual traps of speaking in tongues, the temptation with personal knowledge, and unearthly body contortions are all brought into play. Since everything in the genre utilizes these tactics, to see these at play again is either par for the course or lack of originality for some to sort out for themselves. As well, there's such a dreary and bleak pace on display that can cause this to slow to a crawl at points. This is mainly caused by the first half here going through the usual motions of finding the cause for her to be possessed as worthy of being exorcised so all the fact-gathering aspects have to be featured. From the torment of the staff at the hospital to the backstory about the couples' married life before the possession which includes endless visits with friends and family together, this information while also featuring the cliche doubting priest to further the slow down of the plot. Overall, these are what hold the film down for the most part. The film does have some positive features. Like most genre features, this one gets a lot to like with the painfully obvious storylines and actions here which signal her possessed state. The deformed appearance, with the body full of cuts and scratches, forked tongue, and glassy eyes give enough of a psychical clue but the other scenes here are quite fun. Taunting and tormenting the other nuns, throwing them around the room and all the usual antics commonplace for these films to denote the person's become possessed are all featured here to the point of becoming quite clear of who she is and what's to be done with her. Likewise, the final half here featuring the fun of the exorcism taking place has a lot to like. With the usual standbys including shouting profanity, splashing holy water on everything, and using crosses while quoting the expected Biblical passages, it's no less fun despite these expected qualities which carries over nicely into the final twist. Turning the possession around into a Biblical curse coming to pass and featuring several encounters not usually seen in these kinds of films, this apocalyptic finish has quite a lot to like which does lift this one up somewhat over other exorcism efforts.

Rated Unrated/R: Graphic Language and Graphic Violence.