Exorcism of Emily Rose tops this movie.... And that's not saying a whole lot. The plot was good, the acting....par but you saw everything coming. The ending was I call a "ran out of money" ending. Definitely worth waiting for the DVD release. I didn't mind the whole Blair witch/paranormal activity/cloverfield camera action they used. It was just the fact you knew what was coming 1 step ahead. Not to leave out the very dull ending but I guess it would have cost too much $ to actually leave us paying folk to know what happened to the people we spent the last 87 minutes caring about. Overall had a few creepy parts. Dog barking made my body ache. Just don't waste your time and money running to the theater to see this one.
211 Reviews
Good effort - sadly only an okay product
bowmanblue1 March 2015
If star ratings were awarded for trying, The Devil Inside would definitely get 5/5 stars. It truly wants to be something. Ever since the Blair Witch Project redefined horror with its 'first person perspective' there have been many imitators.
Some have worked, others haven't. Sadly, The Devil Inside is the latter.
Every post-Blair Witch first person film will be judged against Blair Witch and, although The Devil Inside tries to break away, it doesn't really succeed. It's about a girl who goes to the Vatican to track down her long lost mother, who was sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Was she simply mad, or possessed? The Devil Inside lurches from one carbon copy of another similar film to another. I saw shades of Paranormal Activity mixed in there with The Last Exorcism (both superior films in my opinion). The actors did as best they could with what they were given. As with these kinds of films, they did well to capture the 'naturalistic' elements of their dialogue.
It's just not that scary. If you've seen one exorcism movie, then you've basically seen this one (even if this one does do it from a first-person perspective - which The Last Exorcism has already done anyway).
It's not bad, it's just not original. And (SEMI SPOILER ALERT) the ending will leave viewers thoroughly divided. You only have to look at some message boards to see that some people loved it - most despised it and felt ripped off.
It's your call. If you really need one more exorcism movie, then give it a go. But you've probably seen everything The Devil Inside has to offer before... and better.
Some have worked, others haven't. Sadly, The Devil Inside is the latter.
Every post-Blair Witch first person film will be judged against Blair Witch and, although The Devil Inside tries to break away, it doesn't really succeed. It's about a girl who goes to the Vatican to track down her long lost mother, who was sanctioned by the Catholic Church. Was she simply mad, or possessed? The Devil Inside lurches from one carbon copy of another similar film to another. I saw shades of Paranormal Activity mixed in there with The Last Exorcism (both superior films in my opinion). The actors did as best they could with what they were given. As with these kinds of films, they did well to capture the 'naturalistic' elements of their dialogue.
It's just not that scary. If you've seen one exorcism movie, then you've basically seen this one (even if this one does do it from a first-person perspective - which The Last Exorcism has already done anyway).
It's not bad, it's just not original. And (SEMI SPOILER ALERT) the ending will leave viewers thoroughly divided. You only have to look at some message boards to see that some people loved it - most despised it and felt ripped off.
It's your call. If you really need one more exorcism movie, then give it a go. But you've probably seen everything The Devil Inside has to offer before... and better.
Laughing all the way to the bank.
zard-man1 March 2012
Before saying anything, let me point out I watch all films with an open mind, and normally I can enjoy a film regardless of how technically poor it is.
This however, was a farce. I honestly can't believe this film got released into theatres, scene after scene was a regurgitation of scenes that we've all seen before. Not just individual scenes, but the whole tone of the film was so familiar and dull.
I didn't take count, but after a noticeable amount of times of the date being shot at me with a low dong was laughable, the bloke who made it must've watched paranormal activity and thought "ooh that was good, I'll have that... then I'll grossly over use it" There was nothing new about any of the exorcism scenes, apart from it was with a hand held camera.. wow. just watch the exorcist and shake the TV around.
I felt like i was watching an awful, pretentious student film from the outset and most of the acting had me cringing in my seat. I literally have never seen a worse all round acting display in my life... it was just totally unacceptable. They were trying so hard to make it look 'real' or 'genuine' and it just looked pathetic, so many face head scratching and little smirks to themselves.
I won't go into the ending... but it summed the movie up really. unoriginal, contrived and no shock factor (which was obviously intended) you know when a film is so bad its kind of entertaining? well this is just offensive. It was shameful. I can't think of one redeeming quality.
DO NOT SPEND MONEY ON THIS FILM
This however, was a farce. I honestly can't believe this film got released into theatres, scene after scene was a regurgitation of scenes that we've all seen before. Not just individual scenes, but the whole tone of the film was so familiar and dull.
I didn't take count, but after a noticeable amount of times of the date being shot at me with a low dong was laughable, the bloke who made it must've watched paranormal activity and thought "ooh that was good, I'll have that... then I'll grossly over use it" There was nothing new about any of the exorcism scenes, apart from it was with a hand held camera.. wow. just watch the exorcist and shake the TV around.
I felt like i was watching an awful, pretentious student film from the outset and most of the acting had me cringing in my seat. I literally have never seen a worse all round acting display in my life... it was just totally unacceptable. They were trying so hard to make it look 'real' or 'genuine' and it just looked pathetic, so many face head scratching and little smirks to themselves.
I won't go into the ending... but it summed the movie up really. unoriginal, contrived and no shock factor (which was obviously intended) you know when a film is so bad its kind of entertaining? well this is just offensive. It was shameful. I can't think of one redeeming quality.
DO NOT SPEND MONEY ON THIS FILM
Shockingly awful from start to finish.
john_parker199021 March 2012
I'm not even going to go into any great detail... This film is terrible from start to finish and I would urge you not to waste your money going to watch it.
I like anything 'exorcism related', so when i saw the adverts for this i must admit i was quite excited, especially with all the hype surrounding it... I was severely let down to say the least. Quite honestly the adverts contain all the best and most important parts of the film, if theirs 20 minutes of action in total then that's it. To say it's supposed to be a horror film it's more laughable than anything else with no tension, build up, not even any 'cheap' jumps, i could've quite happily watched it when i was 10 and gotten a full nights sleep afterwards, let's put it that way. The cast are totally, TOTALLY wooden and i'm embarrassed to say that the British Simon Quarterman is the worst of them all, his acting was that bad i just wanted to punch him the whole way through, it's like not one of them could be bothered to do a decent job and didn't want to be in it as much as i didn't want to watch it.
Terrible story line, terrible acting, terrible everything. Please don't waste your money.
I like anything 'exorcism related', so when i saw the adverts for this i must admit i was quite excited, especially with all the hype surrounding it... I was severely let down to say the least. Quite honestly the adverts contain all the best and most important parts of the film, if theirs 20 minutes of action in total then that's it. To say it's supposed to be a horror film it's more laughable than anything else with no tension, build up, not even any 'cheap' jumps, i could've quite happily watched it when i was 10 and gotten a full nights sleep afterwards, let's put it that way. The cast are totally, TOTALLY wooden and i'm embarrassed to say that the British Simon Quarterman is the worst of them all, his acting was that bad i just wanted to punch him the whole way through, it's like not one of them could be bothered to do a decent job and didn't want to be in it as much as i didn't want to watch it.
Terrible story line, terrible acting, terrible everything. Please don't waste your money.
The worst horror movie ever
sanghvi431 January 2012
This movie was absolutely pathetic. The actors were terrible and the whole story was just awful. I am really surprised this movie made it to the theatres and made the amount of money it has. I am pretty sure the audience wanted their money back once they watched this turd. The movie has the potential for an interesting story, but the execution of the movie falls flat. The main actress is the worst amateur I have ever seen. The poor acting and bad story telling take you away from the experience that this is based on a true story or real life. I would avoid this movie and just rent The Exorcist. The trailer pretty much gives away all the major parts.
Shaky Camera Garbage
Johnny_West31 October 2017
If you enjoy scenes that come into focus and out of focus as the shaky camera also juggles, this is a great movie.
If you think shaky cameras and blurry movies suck, then we are in agreement. This movie is so awful that I could not see much of it. The characters talk to the camera, because one of them is filming everyone constantly. So in addition to the shaky blurry scenes, we get annoying characters talking to the camera to let the audience know what they are thinking.
I wanted to throw up on the television after a few minutes of this awful movie.
If you think shaky cameras and blurry movies suck, then we are in agreement. This movie is so awful that I could not see much of it. The characters talk to the camera, because one of them is filming everyone constantly. So in addition to the shaky blurry scenes, we get annoying characters talking to the camera to let the audience know what they are thinking.
I wanted to throw up on the television after a few minutes of this awful movie.
A shocker and not in a good way
TheLittleSongbird4 July 2017
Despite not being a fan at all overall of the found footage/mockumentary style, there are some good exceptions out there. While not an avid horror fan, though a long way from a detractor, there are some great examples and some great films based on the subject of exorcism (the king of them all still being 'The Exorcist').
'The Devil Inside' however really fails to deliver. Did form my own opinion, though with a little knowledge of only a few reviews before watching, and watched with an open mind, actually wanting it to be good and be better than the slightly drab premise suggested. 'The Devil Inside' was just a shocker in almost every sense of the word, we are not talking about the type of film it is but the actual quality of the film.
It's not entirely without redeeming merits, though the cons are far more numerous and significantly larger. The best performance comes from Suzan Crowley, who gives a heck of a chilling performance. Surprisingly also the contortionist effects were pretty unsettling.
However, that is it for 'The Devil Inside's' good points. 'The Devil Inside' has such a drab look and further cheapened by the excessive and badly abused (even for this particular style of filming) shaky cam, which will make people nauseous and should come with a health warning for epileptics (speaking as one myself).
Can't remember anything about the music, while the directing is lifelessly amateurish and the script is a shambles with far too much talk and too much emphasis on the science-versus-religion and faith-versus-scepticism, which really bogs down the atmosphere.
No better news about the story or atmosphere either. The story is sluggish, increasingly derivative and predictable, with some unintentionally silly parts too, while the atmosphere in general is just too histrionic and there is next to nothing scary in a film already rather under-populated in the scare factor. Only Crowley and the contortionist effects offer any kind of that.
Much has been said about that abruptly lazy cheat/cop-out of an ending and for very good reason. Crowley aside, the acting is very poor, with a lead performance from Fernanda Andrade that is both histrionic and somnambulist.
All in all, a shocker in almost every way. 2/10 Bethany Cox
'The Devil Inside' however really fails to deliver. Did form my own opinion, though with a little knowledge of only a few reviews before watching, and watched with an open mind, actually wanting it to be good and be better than the slightly drab premise suggested. 'The Devil Inside' was just a shocker in almost every sense of the word, we are not talking about the type of film it is but the actual quality of the film.
It's not entirely without redeeming merits, though the cons are far more numerous and significantly larger. The best performance comes from Suzan Crowley, who gives a heck of a chilling performance. Surprisingly also the contortionist effects were pretty unsettling.
However, that is it for 'The Devil Inside's' good points. 'The Devil Inside' has such a drab look and further cheapened by the excessive and badly abused (even for this particular style of filming) shaky cam, which will make people nauseous and should come with a health warning for epileptics (speaking as one myself).
Can't remember anything about the music, while the directing is lifelessly amateurish and the script is a shambles with far too much talk and too much emphasis on the science-versus-religion and faith-versus-scepticism, which really bogs down the atmosphere.
No better news about the story or atmosphere either. The story is sluggish, increasingly derivative and predictable, with some unintentionally silly parts too, while the atmosphere in general is just too histrionic and there is next to nothing scary in a film already rather under-populated in the scare factor. Only Crowley and the contortionist effects offer any kind of that.
Much has been said about that abruptly lazy cheat/cop-out of an ending and for very good reason. Crowley aside, the acting is very poor, with a lead performance from Fernanda Andrade that is both histrionic and somnambulist.
All in all, a shocker in almost every way. 2/10 Bethany Cox
Boring trash
asmblur5 January 2012
First let me say that I'm not a fan of the fake documentary style movies. I only went to see this film because I don't have to pay due to a family member working at the local theater. That being said, I still feel ripped off! This film consists of very little "action" the majority of the time is spent watching people have discussions or arguments. Even though this was supposed to have been filmed in 2009 there are cheap "aging" effects applied to the film which makes no sense at all. It's not scary or even interesting. Multiple people walked out of the theater during the showing and after it was over I overheard more than one person say that they wanted their money back. I'm writing this review in the hope that I can save other people from wasting their time and/or money on this slop.
The Vatican doesn't endorse this movie for the obvious reason
StevePulaski7 January 2012
The Devil Inside merges two sub-genres of horror that should be killed off like the teens in a remade slasher movie. The exorcism genre and the found footage genre have long overstayed their welcome in the film industry and need to be abolished. The found footage genre, I can sometimes tolerate. The exorcism genre I can barely look at. Merging them together is a colossal miscalculation.
There is something in cinema nicknamed "trailer fail." You may not know the term, but you've certainly experienced it. When a comedy movie experiences "trailer fail," it means all the funny and entertaining scenes exist in the trailer, rendering the rest of the film as "filler comedy." If an action or science fiction film is victim to it, take Richard Gere's The Double, it gives away the big plot twist in the trailer. And if in a horror film, this happens a lot in found footage films, all the jump scares and interesting scenes are in the trailer. The Devil Inside isn't a case of trailer fail, but a case of trailer disgust. Every scene in the trailer is the highest quality material you'll find in this film. If you didn't enjoy the trailer, then you didn't enjoy the best parts.
Most exorcism movies pack in a redundant and asinine plot. This one is no exception. In October of '89, Maria Rossi (Crowely) committed triple murders while performing an exorcism in her ragtag house. Twenty years later, her daughter, now grown up, is Isabella and is in desperate need for answers.
She and her convenient documentarian friend take a trip to Rome, Italy where her mother is being held in a mental hospital to not only seek answers from her, but to dive into the mysteries and the actions of exorcism.
We get a bogus 911 call at the beginning, shaky camera footage upon arrival to the house of Maria Rossi, fake news reports, then we get about a half hour of incredibly mundane and dry dialog about religion, Christianity, the Vatican, churches, and of course, exorcisms. Tell me, Paramount. If you want this to be the next Paranormal Activity, why did you include so many tiresome scenes of dialog that will bore your audiences? That's not to say films like The Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity didn't have dry spots. I was never bored by either, but can see why some were. The big difference with those films is they both had one thing to back themselves up with; an eerie, ominous atmosphere. Nothing about The Devil Inside's setting is eerie or ominous. It's as dry as the material we're presented with.
I will say The Devil Inside gave me one of the best theater experiences I've had in a while. Usually, when a movie ends, at least in ones I see, everyone just gets up and walks out whispering or being utterly silent. I was in a theater of about fifteen people of all different age groups and as soon as the abashed ending rolled around and concluded the mess we all watched, everyone was yelling obscenities and mimicking the film they just saw. When I was in the restroom at the end, I engaged in multiple conversations with people who were just as angry and as cheated as I was. One man said "I haven't seen something that horrible since Will Ferrell's Land of the Lost!" A woman was questioning the ending from multiple aspects. I turned to her and said "a movie of this poor nature is not worth your good questions. It can barely answer its own." Ever since The Exorcist in 1973, we have been paralyzed by the very thoughts of exorcism. Now, we've seen it all. Some people in my theater were laughing at the film. Because it focuses on the exaggerated hokum of the practice. Like all of the movies do. Climbing the walls, spider-walking down the stairs, screaming, using foul language, and out of place deep voices have all become standards in these kinds of films.
Last year, around this same time, a movie about the dramas of the practice came out. It was Anthony Hopkins' The Rite, another film of the same nature I found long and tedious. But at least it had insight, which I believe I acknowledged. The problem was it was long and uneventful, but at least it didn't try to glorify the practice. The Devil Inside doesn't even look in the same direction as the new ground it likes to think it is breaking.
I bring up The Rite because in the time frame of almost a year I've seen a long drama about the practice and a terrible found footage faux documentary on it as well. I found The Rite afloat in a sea of mediocrity, and I find The Devil Inside to be a work of trash filmmaking. My question; will there ever be a good exorcist movie ever again? We've seen two films in two separate genres fail to bring justice to the idea of the practice. My assumption from here on out is that we will never get a film like the 1973 masterpiece.
It's only January, and I have the perfect candidate for the top of my worst films of the year list.
Starring: Fernanda Andrade, Simon Quarterman, Evan Helmuth, and Suzan Crowley. Directed by: William Brent Bell.
There is something in cinema nicknamed "trailer fail." You may not know the term, but you've certainly experienced it. When a comedy movie experiences "trailer fail," it means all the funny and entertaining scenes exist in the trailer, rendering the rest of the film as "filler comedy." If an action or science fiction film is victim to it, take Richard Gere's The Double, it gives away the big plot twist in the trailer. And if in a horror film, this happens a lot in found footage films, all the jump scares and interesting scenes are in the trailer. The Devil Inside isn't a case of trailer fail, but a case of trailer disgust. Every scene in the trailer is the highest quality material you'll find in this film. If you didn't enjoy the trailer, then you didn't enjoy the best parts.
Most exorcism movies pack in a redundant and asinine plot. This one is no exception. In October of '89, Maria Rossi (Crowely) committed triple murders while performing an exorcism in her ragtag house. Twenty years later, her daughter, now grown up, is Isabella and is in desperate need for answers.
She and her convenient documentarian friend take a trip to Rome, Italy where her mother is being held in a mental hospital to not only seek answers from her, but to dive into the mysteries and the actions of exorcism.
We get a bogus 911 call at the beginning, shaky camera footage upon arrival to the house of Maria Rossi, fake news reports, then we get about a half hour of incredibly mundane and dry dialog about religion, Christianity, the Vatican, churches, and of course, exorcisms. Tell me, Paramount. If you want this to be the next Paranormal Activity, why did you include so many tiresome scenes of dialog that will bore your audiences? That's not to say films like The Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity didn't have dry spots. I was never bored by either, but can see why some were. The big difference with those films is they both had one thing to back themselves up with; an eerie, ominous atmosphere. Nothing about The Devil Inside's setting is eerie or ominous. It's as dry as the material we're presented with.
I will say The Devil Inside gave me one of the best theater experiences I've had in a while. Usually, when a movie ends, at least in ones I see, everyone just gets up and walks out whispering or being utterly silent. I was in a theater of about fifteen people of all different age groups and as soon as the abashed ending rolled around and concluded the mess we all watched, everyone was yelling obscenities and mimicking the film they just saw. When I was in the restroom at the end, I engaged in multiple conversations with people who were just as angry and as cheated as I was. One man said "I haven't seen something that horrible since Will Ferrell's Land of the Lost!" A woman was questioning the ending from multiple aspects. I turned to her and said "a movie of this poor nature is not worth your good questions. It can barely answer its own." Ever since The Exorcist in 1973, we have been paralyzed by the very thoughts of exorcism. Now, we've seen it all. Some people in my theater were laughing at the film. Because it focuses on the exaggerated hokum of the practice. Like all of the movies do. Climbing the walls, spider-walking down the stairs, screaming, using foul language, and out of place deep voices have all become standards in these kinds of films.
Last year, around this same time, a movie about the dramas of the practice came out. It was Anthony Hopkins' The Rite, another film of the same nature I found long and tedious. But at least it had insight, which I believe I acknowledged. The problem was it was long and uneventful, but at least it didn't try to glorify the practice. The Devil Inside doesn't even look in the same direction as the new ground it likes to think it is breaking.
I bring up The Rite because in the time frame of almost a year I've seen a long drama about the practice and a terrible found footage faux documentary on it as well. I found The Rite afloat in a sea of mediocrity, and I find The Devil Inside to be a work of trash filmmaking. My question; will there ever be a good exorcist movie ever again? We've seen two films in two separate genres fail to bring justice to the idea of the practice. My assumption from here on out is that we will never get a film like the 1973 masterpiece.
It's only January, and I have the perfect candidate for the top of my worst films of the year list.
Starring: Fernanda Andrade, Simon Quarterman, Evan Helmuth, and Suzan Crowley. Directed by: William Brent Bell.
Okay Movie.
fairy_dust1047 January 2012
The movie was better than any other exorcism/exorcist movie I've seen. Definitely better than all the Paranormal Activities, but it was also low quality. The whole movie was very shaky, very few times was the camera held still. The angles the cameras were put in were kind of odd. The ending was absolutely terrible. There were parts that made you jump but for the most part, it was like any other documentary film about this kind of stuff. I would recommend it to anyone who likes the thrill of stuff like that, but for anybody else, do not waste your money. For the few parts that they actually showed an exorcism, compared to what the previews show, it wasn't worth it at all.
Oh, gosh!
moviemaniac00829 January 2012
Where do I begin? This movie is awful, in every aspect of the word.
Further justifications: Every thing sucked in this film. The acting was very wooden. Fernanda Andrade is not a good lead actress, but she is hot, so I guess the film could score mild points for that...but the rest of the cast is just incredibly bad (Hmm...That's a bit of a stretch...Suzan Crowley is pretty freaky as Maria Rossi), but every other actor looks like they couldn't care less about the film. They look annoyed, even more annoyed than the audience watching it. It's as if the project was something very boring for them and they couldn't wait to get the hell off of it.
I understand this is mockumentary, but whoever was handling the camera sucked. Did he just discover the zoom button? Because the fact that the camera would close up on faces and then back continuously really annoyed the $h!t out of me. Finally, I felt there was a lack of scares: I jumped once, which is the same place I jumped in the trailer (the one where Maria Rossi starts to laugh suddenly). The scriptwriters decided to get lazy as well, I suppose, because right when the movie is about to get interesting, it cuts to black and ends, telling us to check a website. What's that if it's not telling the audience to f--k off. I felt like I had been insulted.
Bottom line: I knew from the start that this movie would be bad. A friend of mine convinced me to go with a few girls, who chose to see this movie. If only I had listened to my first instinct.
Look, this movie made 33 times it's budget on opening weekend (33 million dollars for a 1 million dollar budget). The studios don't care about the people who watch this film anymore, and quite frankly, you shouldn't care about this movie either. It's not worth seeing in theatres - wait - It's not worth seeing at all! When is Hollywood going to realize that over doing mockumentaries just gets annoying because they don't scare us anymore. Hollywood, never, ever, release a film this bad again! 1/10
Further justifications: Every thing sucked in this film. The acting was very wooden. Fernanda Andrade is not a good lead actress, but she is hot, so I guess the film could score mild points for that...but the rest of the cast is just incredibly bad (Hmm...That's a bit of a stretch...Suzan Crowley is pretty freaky as Maria Rossi), but every other actor looks like they couldn't care less about the film. They look annoyed, even more annoyed than the audience watching it. It's as if the project was something very boring for them and they couldn't wait to get the hell off of it.
I understand this is mockumentary, but whoever was handling the camera sucked. Did he just discover the zoom button? Because the fact that the camera would close up on faces and then back continuously really annoyed the $h!t out of me. Finally, I felt there was a lack of scares: I jumped once, which is the same place I jumped in the trailer (the one where Maria Rossi starts to laugh suddenly). The scriptwriters decided to get lazy as well, I suppose, because right when the movie is about to get interesting, it cuts to black and ends, telling us to check a website. What's that if it's not telling the audience to f--k off. I felt like I had been insulted.
Bottom line: I knew from the start that this movie would be bad. A friend of mine convinced me to go with a few girls, who chose to see this movie. If only I had listened to my first instinct.
Look, this movie made 33 times it's budget on opening weekend (33 million dollars for a 1 million dollar budget). The studios don't care about the people who watch this film anymore, and quite frankly, you shouldn't care about this movie either. It's not worth seeing in theatres - wait - It's not worth seeing at all! When is Hollywood going to realize that over doing mockumentaries just gets annoying because they don't scare us anymore. Hollywood, never, ever, release a film this bad again! 1/10
Nauseating
drummystix22 January 2012
I'm not one to write reviews, this would be my first actually. But I had to comment because of how brutally disappointed I was. I was very excited to see the movie, as I have loved all the exorcism type movies, and just scary movies in general. But I was really disappointed as due to the EXTREMELY shaky camera work, I couldn't even watch the movie without feeling like I was going to throw up. I ended up keeping my eyes off the screen for probably about 80% of the movie. Besides the extreme motion sickness that it gave me, there was no real climax to the story, and it wasn't scary what so ever. Waste of money in my opinion.
Much better than expected!
MisterNicholas7 January 2012
First of all, I just want to say that I went into the theater with very little expectations for this movie. My friend had been talking about how she wanted to see it since the trailers first started popping up. So, we ended up going last night to see this (opening night).
Let me just say that the theater was PACKED for this movie. We got to the theater 30 minutes before the start time and the line was already out the door. As for the movie itself, it started off slow in the beginning and slowly got more and more intense. The exorcism scenes were especially frightening and very well done in my opinion.
The movie is a mockumentary style movie, so it does feel real as some points. The ending is very intense and I was pleased. However, most of the theater booed when the credits started rolling. Of course, 75% of the theater was teenagers.
Overall, I give this film a 7 out of 10. It wasn't the best exorcism movie I've seen; but it also wasn't the worst. Worth the money.
Let me just say that the theater was PACKED for this movie. We got to the theater 30 minutes before the start time and the line was already out the door. As for the movie itself, it started off slow in the beginning and slowly got more and more intense. The exorcism scenes were especially frightening and very well done in my opinion.
The movie is a mockumentary style movie, so it does feel real as some points. The ending is very intense and I was pleased. However, most of the theater booed when the credits started rolling. Of course, 75% of the theater was teenagers.
Overall, I give this film a 7 out of 10. It wasn't the best exorcism movie I've seen; but it also wasn't the worst. Worth the money.
The Repugnance Inside
MovieProductions7 January 2012
* out of (****)
Exorcism films are one of the hardest films to make for two reasons. (1) Critics and audiences alike dethrone nearly any film that doesn't measure up to the impeccable heights of that of Friedkin's 1973 cinematic icon "The Exorcist". And (2) Because they offer next to nothing to the table, making it 80+ minutes of virtually watching the same film- over and over again. (Sometimes even less than 80- Thank the Lord). So typically, I tend to try to be as lenient as possible when critiquing a film of such content because I know it is a tough accomplishment to actually make a serviceable horror flick.
Bell's sophomore effort "The Devil Inside" revolves around Isabella Rossi (Fernanda Andrade) who traveled to Italy to attend exorcism school and to pay a visit to her ill mother Maria Rossi, played by Suzan Crowley. From there, a few questions are at stake. What's wrong with Maria Rossi? Could Maria's demon be transferred to her daughter? Could Isabella turn out like her mother?
Just by hearing the synopsis, I'm pretty sure you don't need to spare 87 minutes to conjure up some logical answers based on the aforementioned questions. But let's talk about the performances first. The acting is surprisingly decent. Everyone here does there job... but that's pretty much it. You can certainly throw character development out the window as every actor is dull and about as lifeless as a cardboard cut-out. It's hard to sympathize with our main protagonists when they aren't even established as characters. Strike one. Strike two, the film takes an excruciatingly long time to get the ball rolling. For the first hour or so, you have to hear some tedious blabber about religion, which doesn't serve as controversial, but just insipid and soporific. I don't mind drawn-out sequences of dialogue, if it has something to say about our characters or the plot, but it's used to consume most of the already short running time. Here's my philosophy: If you don't have enough footage to tell your story and still keep your audience's interest, don't stretch out what originally could've been a solid 15 minute story into 70 more minutes.
Now onto the question everyone wants to know: Is it scary? Absolutely not. "Devil" resorts to generic jump scares, heavy cut-aways, and the shaking of the camera. If you weren't scared by the trailer, you must certainly won't be by the film. Which reminds me, if you're going to shoot a film in mockumentary style, at least make it believable. Just because you shoot in found-footage doesn't mean you can side-skirt believability. I'm one who is prone to stretch my imagination, but not as far as Bell wants me to. What am I, an imbecile?
And lastly, this film is just so predictable. If you're film isn't frightening, and certainly isn't interesting, try to spice it up a bit. If you've watched any film about an exorcism, you've seen this one already. I completely guessed the "twist" (if you can even call it one) even before I got to the theater. And that ending? One of the most retarded endings I've seen in a long time. How they got away with such a haphazard ending is just... MIND BOGGLING.
For the first thirty minutes or so, "The Devil Inside" isn't such a bad outing. It raises a few interesting plot points, the direction is pretty good for the most part, and actually got me invested in what Bell was trying to sell the viewer here. After that, it's pretty much downhill and when you think things couldn't get any worse, the last five minutes prove that. Just when you think the film was going somewhere, it just cuts you off and is of the equivalence of shoving the middle finger down our throats, saying "Ha Ha. I took your money. See us next year for the sequel." All I wanted to see was a decent exorcism movie. I didn't care how predicable or clichéd it was. I didn't care if I was the biggest fan of the actors or not. All I asked for was a decent way to spend 87 minutes, and I couldn't even get that. If you seriously want a good exorcism movie, rent "The Exorcist" or if you want something more modern, see "The Last Exorcism". But for the love of God (no pun intended), do not see "The REPUGNANCE Inside" or "The Rite". Oh and the film apparently wants you to see their "website"? F. THAT.
Exorcism films are one of the hardest films to make for two reasons. (1) Critics and audiences alike dethrone nearly any film that doesn't measure up to the impeccable heights of that of Friedkin's 1973 cinematic icon "The Exorcist". And (2) Because they offer next to nothing to the table, making it 80+ minutes of virtually watching the same film- over and over again. (Sometimes even less than 80- Thank the Lord). So typically, I tend to try to be as lenient as possible when critiquing a film of such content because I know it is a tough accomplishment to actually make a serviceable horror flick.
Bell's sophomore effort "The Devil Inside" revolves around Isabella Rossi (Fernanda Andrade) who traveled to Italy to attend exorcism school and to pay a visit to her ill mother Maria Rossi, played by Suzan Crowley. From there, a few questions are at stake. What's wrong with Maria Rossi? Could Maria's demon be transferred to her daughter? Could Isabella turn out like her mother?
Just by hearing the synopsis, I'm pretty sure you don't need to spare 87 minutes to conjure up some logical answers based on the aforementioned questions. But let's talk about the performances first. The acting is surprisingly decent. Everyone here does there job... but that's pretty much it. You can certainly throw character development out the window as every actor is dull and about as lifeless as a cardboard cut-out. It's hard to sympathize with our main protagonists when they aren't even established as characters. Strike one. Strike two, the film takes an excruciatingly long time to get the ball rolling. For the first hour or so, you have to hear some tedious blabber about religion, which doesn't serve as controversial, but just insipid and soporific. I don't mind drawn-out sequences of dialogue, if it has something to say about our characters or the plot, but it's used to consume most of the already short running time. Here's my philosophy: If you don't have enough footage to tell your story and still keep your audience's interest, don't stretch out what originally could've been a solid 15 minute story into 70 more minutes.
Now onto the question everyone wants to know: Is it scary? Absolutely not. "Devil" resorts to generic jump scares, heavy cut-aways, and the shaking of the camera. If you weren't scared by the trailer, you must certainly won't be by the film. Which reminds me, if you're going to shoot a film in mockumentary style, at least make it believable. Just because you shoot in found-footage doesn't mean you can side-skirt believability. I'm one who is prone to stretch my imagination, but not as far as Bell wants me to. What am I, an imbecile?
And lastly, this film is just so predictable. If you're film isn't frightening, and certainly isn't interesting, try to spice it up a bit. If you've watched any film about an exorcism, you've seen this one already. I completely guessed the "twist" (if you can even call it one) even before I got to the theater. And that ending? One of the most retarded endings I've seen in a long time. How they got away with such a haphazard ending is just... MIND BOGGLING.
For the first thirty minutes or so, "The Devil Inside" isn't such a bad outing. It raises a few interesting plot points, the direction is pretty good for the most part, and actually got me invested in what Bell was trying to sell the viewer here. After that, it's pretty much downhill and when you think things couldn't get any worse, the last five minutes prove that. Just when you think the film was going somewhere, it just cuts you off and is of the equivalence of shoving the middle finger down our throats, saying "Ha Ha. I took your money. See us next year for the sequel." All I wanted to see was a decent exorcism movie. I didn't care how predicable or clichéd it was. I didn't care if I was the biggest fan of the actors or not. All I asked for was a decent way to spend 87 minutes, and I couldn't even get that. If you seriously want a good exorcism movie, rent "The Exorcist" or if you want something more modern, see "The Last Exorcism". But for the love of God (no pun intended), do not see "The REPUGNANCE Inside" or "The Rite". Oh and the film apparently wants you to see their "website"? F. THAT.
Would be a pretty solid movie...if it were finished
IheartCali588211 January 2012
In the same vein as Blair Witch and the Paranormal Franchise, The Devil Inside is another entry in the hand-held documentary style film. Although I think Blair Witch and PA did a much better job of making the "found footage" gimmick believable. Anyway The Devil Inside tells the story of a young girl, Isabelle who travels to Italy to learn more of the so-called demonic possession of her institutionalized mother.
The film opens with a 911 call made from the girl's mother in which she confesses to murdering three people who were trying to perform an exorcism. I guess it's safe to say it didn't work because when we next see the mother, she's holed up in Italian hospital for the criminally insane, mumbling to herself and looking generally frightening. Isabelle is looking to investigate the circumstances behind her mother's crimes and hopefully get her returned to the United States. And so the footage goes, mostly capturing her quest to learn more about exorcism, along with some help from two men she meets at a Roman Catholic university.
It could have been a very effective film if it wasn't for the glaringly flawed ending. Up to that point there was nice buildup and a few rather shocking moments. Then abruptly, it just ended. Poof! Like that. Shows over, go home. Myself along with the entire audience sat there for several moments after the ending scene, waiting....for something. I guess it took a few minutes to realize there would be nothing else. The ending came out of nowhere. None of the questions raised by the film were ever answered. The last 10 minutes embarked on a different path that just wasn't followed. It appeared as if the final climax was coming and then somehow the producers ran out of money so they just wrapped the film with whatever footage they had.
As it stands, the movie is incomplete so I can't give it more than a 5. Had there been an additional 20 minutes or more, I probably would have given it a 6.5 or 7.
This movie should have been titled The Devil Inside: Part 1.
Where the heck is the last half?!
The film opens with a 911 call made from the girl's mother in which she confesses to murdering three people who were trying to perform an exorcism. I guess it's safe to say it didn't work because when we next see the mother, she's holed up in Italian hospital for the criminally insane, mumbling to herself and looking generally frightening. Isabelle is looking to investigate the circumstances behind her mother's crimes and hopefully get her returned to the United States. And so the footage goes, mostly capturing her quest to learn more about exorcism, along with some help from two men she meets at a Roman Catholic university.
It could have been a very effective film if it wasn't for the glaringly flawed ending. Up to that point there was nice buildup and a few rather shocking moments. Then abruptly, it just ended. Poof! Like that. Shows over, go home. Myself along with the entire audience sat there for several moments after the ending scene, waiting....for something. I guess it took a few minutes to realize there would be nothing else. The ending came out of nowhere. None of the questions raised by the film were ever answered. The last 10 minutes embarked on a different path that just wasn't followed. It appeared as if the final climax was coming and then somehow the producers ran out of money so they just wrapped the film with whatever footage they had.
As it stands, the movie is incomplete so I can't give it more than a 5. Had there been an additional 20 minutes or more, I probably would have given it a 6.5 or 7.
This movie should have been titled The Devil Inside: Part 1.
Where the heck is the last half?!
More laughs than screams
beardedguy885 January 2012
Just came back from a screening in downtown Toronto, and I didn't have high expectations.
Needless to say, I was correct. The folks were literally laughing out loud and there were barely about 3 or 4 "frighting" scenes. The movie it self had a few jokes, I guess nothing to laugh AT the movie, but more like with the movie, but it doesn't do well when they are trying to scare you. Tons of jibber jabber and barely any scary moments.
I don't know if this is a spoiler, but the ending was NOT satisfactory. You will leave angry and feel as if you have wasted your time, the movie isn't even that long!
If you can skip this, do it. You won't miss anything.
Needless to say, I was correct. The folks were literally laughing out loud and there were barely about 3 or 4 "frighting" scenes. The movie it self had a few jokes, I guess nothing to laugh AT the movie, but more like with the movie, but it doesn't do well when they are trying to scare you. Tons of jibber jabber and barely any scary moments.
I don't know if this is a spoiler, but the ending was NOT satisfactory. You will leave angry and feel as if you have wasted your time, the movie isn't even that long!
If you can skip this, do it. You won't miss anything.
The Devil Inside:-a shame in the name of horror.
GaneshKSalian24 March 2012
The Devil Inside directed by William Brent Bell is one of the worst horror movies I have ever seen.The movie is also a waste of money since it does not scare you at all.The movie has just a scene or two that scares you.While the rest of the movie runs like a television-drama.The movie is shot in a documentary style.The movie's climax is very bad,thus it is one of the worst climax ever.
Story:- In Italy, a woman Isabella Rossi(Fernanda Andrade) becomes involved in a series of unauthorized exorcisms during her mission to discover what happened to her mother Maria Rossi(Susan Crowley), who allegedly murdered three people during her own exorcism.
The sole reason I am giving it two is,one point for the good story and another one for the performance of Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley.
The direction is bad.
The screenplay is bad too.
Performances:- Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley are good.Even Helmuth and Simon Quarterman are okay.
All in all,The Devil Inside is bad horror movie more so because of its abrupt ending and lack of scares in addition to that.
Story:- In Italy, a woman Isabella Rossi(Fernanda Andrade) becomes involved in a series of unauthorized exorcisms during her mission to discover what happened to her mother Maria Rossi(Susan Crowley), who allegedly murdered three people during her own exorcism.
The sole reason I am giving it two is,one point for the good story and another one for the performance of Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley.
The direction is bad.
The screenplay is bad too.
Performances:- Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley are good.Even Helmuth and Simon Quarterman are okay.
All in all,The Devil Inside is bad horror movie more so because of its abrupt ending and lack of scares in addition to that.
Good enough to see, leaves much to be desired.
reilly_566 January 2012
Heading into this film I expected an experience similar to The Exorcism of Emily Rose, or The Exorcist, based upon the marketing campaign and what was shown in trailers.
What I saw was much different.
This film is shot and plotted in a style similar to Paranormal Activity.
The audience is introduced to Isabella Rossi, a non-relatable, bland character who's mother is presumed to be possessed. She lacked a lot in character depth, and the film did not deal with the existential questions she might have about her future, the future of her mother, and her family. The facade of a "documentary" is easily broken after about two or three scenes featuring Isabella, as her believability and presence are akin to those of a poorly written fan- fiction character, possibly even worse.
The main selling point for most when it comes to The Devil Inside is the actual scenes from the exorcisms and activity of the possessed. Which, in fairness, was pretty much the only good part of the film.
There were only three scenes featuring Maria Rossi, Isabella's mother, whose possession seemed, at first, to be the central plot of the film, but she is never revisited after one attempt at exorcism.
There is more "intrigue" about two priests who are "vigilante exorcists" and who are performing exorcisms against the will of the Vatican. I found this idea laughable, and somewhat clever at best. It made the film even less believable and these character's presences made the others even less relatable because of their unrealistic reactions to the various dangerous, and frankly traumatic situations the priests get the protagonists into.
Although this film contains one of the most graphic suicide scenes I've seen to date, which may intrigue some people.
In summation (tl;dr) crappy Paranormal Activity with fewer ghosts and more priests, poorly written and developed characters, many loose ends, and an attempt at an ending that would make viewers think, but ultimately just made the film worse.
What I saw was much different.
This film is shot and plotted in a style similar to Paranormal Activity.
The audience is introduced to Isabella Rossi, a non-relatable, bland character who's mother is presumed to be possessed. She lacked a lot in character depth, and the film did not deal with the existential questions she might have about her future, the future of her mother, and her family. The facade of a "documentary" is easily broken after about two or three scenes featuring Isabella, as her believability and presence are akin to those of a poorly written fan- fiction character, possibly even worse.
The main selling point for most when it comes to The Devil Inside is the actual scenes from the exorcisms and activity of the possessed. Which, in fairness, was pretty much the only good part of the film.
There were only three scenes featuring Maria Rossi, Isabella's mother, whose possession seemed, at first, to be the central plot of the film, but she is never revisited after one attempt at exorcism.
There is more "intrigue" about two priests who are "vigilante exorcists" and who are performing exorcisms against the will of the Vatican. I found this idea laughable, and somewhat clever at best. It made the film even less believable and these character's presences made the others even less relatable because of their unrealistic reactions to the various dangerous, and frankly traumatic situations the priests get the protagonists into.
Although this film contains one of the most graphic suicide scenes I've seen to date, which may intrigue some people.
In summation (tl;dr) crappy Paranormal Activity with fewer ghosts and more priests, poorly written and developed characters, many loose ends, and an attempt at an ending that would make viewers think, but ultimately just made the film worse.
Great Exorcism Movie, Not the Best but Still Great
Chaosmetal695 January 2012
First and foremost I will say that this is a mockumentary type movie. A mockumentary is the kind of movie where they make it seem like a documentary but it's fake. I like them because they seem more real, This one includes interviews, hand-camera shots etc. I'll say it right now and that is if you don't like blair witch style movies and those fake documentary style movies then this probably isn't for you.
The movie itself is about a woman who discovered her mother was involved in an exorcism and was shipped out to Rome, Italy afterward and she goes to discover why and look for some answers.
Things all go downhill for her from there.
The movie's acting and story are great I had no issues whatsoever with it there. You could tell it seems a tad amateurish in terms of their acting at times but I still thought everyone did well in it.
The story and scary scenes were all great, I've seen a number of these styles of movies, Quite a lot more then the average watcher and this one while it won't give me nightmares at night it still delivered a few very solid and tense scenes. I was a bit let down by the ending though and that was my only issue I had with the whole film.
The make-up and dialogue were all very good too and at times during some of the exorcisms it almost reminded me a little bit of the original exorcism which you can tell the film makers had a lot of influence from that.
My only qualms against this movie were that there could have been more scary scenes and I wished for a better ending. That said though the scary scenes that were there were very nicely done!
I have a feeling this movie will get a lot of hate because of its mockumentary style of filming which is not very Hollywood like of horror movies so I feel a lot of people will dislike it for that but if you're in the mood for a horror that's got a dark realistic tone to it then by all means give it a go and you shouldn't be disappointed.
The movie itself is about a woman who discovered her mother was involved in an exorcism and was shipped out to Rome, Italy afterward and she goes to discover why and look for some answers.
Things all go downhill for her from there.
The movie's acting and story are great I had no issues whatsoever with it there. You could tell it seems a tad amateurish in terms of their acting at times but I still thought everyone did well in it.
The story and scary scenes were all great, I've seen a number of these styles of movies, Quite a lot more then the average watcher and this one while it won't give me nightmares at night it still delivered a few very solid and tense scenes. I was a bit let down by the ending though and that was my only issue I had with the whole film.
The make-up and dialogue were all very good too and at times during some of the exorcisms it almost reminded me a little bit of the original exorcism which you can tell the film makers had a lot of influence from that.
My only qualms against this movie were that there could have been more scary scenes and I wished for a better ending. That said though the scary scenes that were there were very nicely done!
I have a feeling this movie will get a lot of hate because of its mockumentary style of filming which is not very Hollywood like of horror movies so I feel a lot of people will dislike it for that but if you're in the mood for a horror that's got a dark realistic tone to it then by all means give it a go and you shouldn't be disappointed.
Save your time and money by watching the red band trailer instead...
moviewizguy5 January 2012
In 1989, emergency responders received a 9-1-1 call from Maria Rossi confessing that she had brutally killed three people. 20 years later, her daughter Isabella seeks to understand the truth about what happened that night. She travels to the Centrino Hospital for the Criminally Insane in Italy where her mother has been locked away to determine if her mother is mentally ill or demonically possessed. When she recruits two young exorcists to cure her mom using unconventional methods combining both science and religion, they come face-to-face with pure evil in the form of four powerful demons possessing Maria. Many have been possessed by one; only one has been possessed by many. (Paramount Pictures)
Just recently, Paramount Pictures was named the studio that topped the 2011 box office above all the other major studios. If they want any more people to show up to their films in 2012, they should stop green-lighting films like THE DEVIL INSIDE, although dumping it in January seems like the best decision to forget the film ever existed by the end of the year. Yes, the film produces more unintentional laughs than actual scares. Yes, many people will walk out feeling ripped off once the credits roll. And yes, THE DEVIL INSIDE is a bad film, unfortunately, although the incredible red band trailer suggests otherwise. However, the trailer spoils all the "good," jolting parts in the film. Surprise, surprise.
As you can tell, there are many problems regarding the film. However, some of the ones that stand out are the incredibly slow pacing and the dull execution. The few, lazy, cheap scares the film has to offer, the only things left to salvage this dreck from a total waste, are few and far between. To say that the film was tedious to watch would be an understatement. Also, the documentary style serves more to harm than help the film, as every scene that should feel spontaneous and authentic, instead, feel rather staged. With the many problems the film has, the film's biggest crime is the abrupt ending, which is like getting slapped in the face. Just as the film is starting to pick up momentum, it ends as if the filmmakers ran out of budget. Note to all filmmakers: You don't want to anger audiences like that.
The cast don't do much to help elevate the film either. Fernanda Andrade, the female lead, is merely serviceable although nothing memorable. However, Suzan Crowley, in the few scenes that she's in, is rather good for what she had to work with. I can't say much for the rest of the supporting cast, which includes Simon Quarterman, Evan Helmuth, and Ionut Grama. Grama, in particular, is incredibly bad as he tries to make his reactions and emotions feel real that it comes off as forced and awkward.
I suppose the film will open reasonably well in the box office like most found footage films with low budgets and make a cheap buck before disappearing off in the world. However, I'm here to warn you not to give in to what appears to be a fun, scary night at the movie theater. It's a slow, dull film with barely any scares at all. Yes, the potential for the idea is there, but the execution is just bad. THE EXORCIST this is not.
Just recently, Paramount Pictures was named the studio that topped the 2011 box office above all the other major studios. If they want any more people to show up to their films in 2012, they should stop green-lighting films like THE DEVIL INSIDE, although dumping it in January seems like the best decision to forget the film ever existed by the end of the year. Yes, the film produces more unintentional laughs than actual scares. Yes, many people will walk out feeling ripped off once the credits roll. And yes, THE DEVIL INSIDE is a bad film, unfortunately, although the incredible red band trailer suggests otherwise. However, the trailer spoils all the "good," jolting parts in the film. Surprise, surprise.
As you can tell, there are many problems regarding the film. However, some of the ones that stand out are the incredibly slow pacing and the dull execution. The few, lazy, cheap scares the film has to offer, the only things left to salvage this dreck from a total waste, are few and far between. To say that the film was tedious to watch would be an understatement. Also, the documentary style serves more to harm than help the film, as every scene that should feel spontaneous and authentic, instead, feel rather staged. With the many problems the film has, the film's biggest crime is the abrupt ending, which is like getting slapped in the face. Just as the film is starting to pick up momentum, it ends as if the filmmakers ran out of budget. Note to all filmmakers: You don't want to anger audiences like that.
The cast don't do much to help elevate the film either. Fernanda Andrade, the female lead, is merely serviceable although nothing memorable. However, Suzan Crowley, in the few scenes that she's in, is rather good for what she had to work with. I can't say much for the rest of the supporting cast, which includes Simon Quarterman, Evan Helmuth, and Ionut Grama. Grama, in particular, is incredibly bad as he tries to make his reactions and emotions feel real that it comes off as forced and awkward.
I suppose the film will open reasonably well in the box office like most found footage films with low budgets and make a cheap buck before disappearing off in the world. However, I'm here to warn you not to give in to what appears to be a fun, scary night at the movie theater. It's a slow, dull film with barely any scares at all. Yes, the potential for the idea is there, but the execution is just bad. THE EXORCIST this is not.
Surprised by all the bad reviews
snowskiman7 January 2012
I'm glad I didn't listen to all the bad reviews of this movie. I own a commercial Haunted House and this movie was entertaining. I don't scare very easily and there were several times where it startled me. Was worth the money. At the end of the movie, there was a scene that was silent and you could hear a pin drop to the carpet in the crowded movie theater (no candy wrappers, talking or noise from the audience). My haunted house bases it's scenes on scary movies and I got a couple of good ideas from the movie. One thing I didn't care for was that the movie was trying to make you believe it was a documentary so the camera was very shaky and made me kind of dizzy at times.
Good movie, ending makes you either cringe or wanting more
Eldiablo3347 January 2012
I went to go see this movie tonight and had high hopes and expectations for it. After seeing the trailer i was automatically bought into the hype, but had the thoughts "please don't be an Apollo 18". After seeing the movie, in my opinion all the hype was payed off for, i thought the movie had an excellent plot line and some of the scenes make you wonder "how can you do that?" or "this can't be fake". yes the camera is shaky but it's a found footage film, not much you can do. I mean everyone loves paranormal activity and it's a found footage film. Anyway if you want a movie night with your friends, or want to see it with your boyfriend/girlfriend. i suggest seeing it. it's a decent film as long as your not squeamish
Cinema Blue Balls: The Devil Inside Can't Come
misoka6 January 2012
Why is this movie so bad? Why the outrage? While the movie's trailers portrays foreboding eerie exorcism sequences and the following of Isabella, the main protagonist, what the audience is actually presented with is a scattered focus with no real main character development, and minor disturbing exorcism scenes. Lack of character development inherently draws apathy from movie goers. The supposed scary scenes are not much in comparison with many other movies of the horror genre.
However, the main disappointment, is right at the climax of the film, which I shan't spoil for any potential viewers. The audience is abruptly hit with the movie's ending, which leaves very much to be desired. It is as if the structure of the story's beginning, rising action, and climax (yes I said 'climax') is there, but the writer completely forgot the resolution part of what comprises a story. This left the audience in my theater booing and demanding refunds. There was no explanation to what happened, no resolution to the characters' fates.
However, the main disappointment, is right at the climax of the film, which I shan't spoil for any potential viewers. The audience is abruptly hit with the movie's ending, which leaves very much to be desired. It is as if the structure of the story's beginning, rising action, and climax (yes I said 'climax') is there, but the writer completely forgot the resolution part of what comprises a story. This left the audience in my theater booing and demanding refunds. There was no explanation to what happened, no resolution to the characters' fates.
Absolutely Terrible
ace500011 January 2012
With the annoying way too shaky camera, the ridiculous fast-zoom ultra close-ups, and crazy angles I got the worst headache and left the theater within 20 minutes. At one point I was seeing a close-up of an actors neck instead of what could have been beautiful background shots of driving down the street in Rome. The camera man is clearly "non-intelligent" to the extreme, who's "technique" was so distracting, the film is impossible to watch. I sincerely hope this shaky cam stuff comes to an end as I personally can't stand it. It's also unfortunate this horrible release made more than a dime. If you like the idea of driving to a theater, paying cash, and getting yourself a head-banger - this is the film for you.
When Satan looks in the toilet, what does he see?
hitchcockthelegend16 September 2012
The answer to the title question is most likely this near repugnant cash in on a horror sub-genre that is being milked for all its worth. As always with horror as a genre, even the most unimaginative movie will find staunch supporters, such is the case with this here picture from William Brent Bell. That's not to sarcastically put down those who enjoy it, for without doubt some do find any form of demonic possession in movies as being terrifying, but in a movie that runs at under 80 minutes, there's under ten minutes of unease, chills or possession based terror. Yes a couple of scenes hold the tingle on the spine, and true enough to say that Suzan Crowley as Maria Rossi acts superbly, but what about the rest of it? The structure and formula is tired, there's no attempt to spin something new into the demonic possession market, while the ending is undoubtedly as bad a cop-out as you may have heard it is.
Cribbing from any number of movies that are far better, devoid of a sense of build up and sustaining of atmosphere, it is what it is. A lazy cash cow aimed at a small niche in the horror fan universe who find the thematics reason enough to get involved with it. My honest advice is to just watch the trailer instead and skip the movie. 4/10
Cribbing from any number of movies that are far better, devoid of a sense of build up and sustaining of atmosphere, it is what it is. A lazy cash cow aimed at a small niche in the horror fan universe who find the thematics reason enough to get involved with it. My honest advice is to just watch the trailer instead and skip the movie. 4/10
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
