6/10
Less is More in Horror... Still
3 July 2014
This film is worth seeing (hence how it got the minimal viewing score, a 6) But if your at least a novice fan of horror films, you will undoubtedly find yourself critiquing the film "scare-by-scare."

Ramirez was great, you can easily perceive how he's one of fastest ascending actors in Hollywood, BUT he was in a no-win situation playing an exorcist, a strange one at that. Think about this... When was the last time you actually felt afraid watching an exorcism on screen? -It wasn't via any self-announced Exorcism film garbage (yes, that includes The Rite), it wasn't even in the Conjuring (which although a terrifying film, the exorcism scene was admittedly lackluster). The point is, outside of maybe The Exorcism of Emily Rose (this director could have taken a cue from one of his earlier films), there HAS NOT been one Horror Film to scares us like the Original did oh so long ago!

Since the trailer was excellent, I thought maybe this film could do it; breathe new fear into the 'Sub-Horror Possession Genre', BUT it didn't. The exorcism(s) were laughable (even with Ramirez's inept performance) due mainly to major inconsistencies involving the possessed (including when they were or weren't), a lack of established motive (by either the possessed or demon), as well as a disappointing origin of the demon.

Maybe it's too hard to make an exorcism scary anymore (ESPECIALLY when you DON'T do what's listed above)!

In Addition: Derrickson, like almost ALL horror filmmakers these days, gives away WAYYY too much for the audience to not only see but to understand (which steals a level of necessary mystique). This film is proof that a Great Cast + a fairly original idea (and supposedly based on a true story) does not = a compelling film without the foundation of sufficient details.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed