John DeSando

19 May 2013

Derivative Demon

"An exorcism is tantamount to a miracle - an extraordinary interventionof God." Gabriele NanniAs a fallen down, Catholic-trained moviegoer, I am still in awe of thepapacy, the Basilica, and priests in general. I will have to say if thepope didn't sanction the exorcisms in The Devil Within, then he isright for a change. It is possession porn ripped right out of theframes of The Exorcist, Blair Witch, The Rite, and Paranormal Activity. Like last summer's The Last Exorcism, it's a found footage, fauxdocumentary, demon drama, this time about a young woman, Isabella Rossi(Fernanda Andrade), who goes to Italy to find her mother, Maria (SuzanCrowley), who was placed in Rome's Centrino Hospital for the CriminallyInsane (I don't know why there and probably nobody else knows) aftershe allegedly murdered three people during her own exorcism.The series of unauthorized exorcisms Isabella becomes involved in tounderstand her mother's crime are boilerplate movie mosh ups using thesame foul language ("The pig is mine!"), the same rude force hurtlingpeople around the room, and no resolution or understanding of whatforces are at work here, beyond the bland "devil."If you must see this drivel, you must stay until the end to see one ofthe lamest conclusions ever in film. Come to think of it, we may behard pressed to find another film this bad the entire year of 2012. "Itis precisely our job as Catholics to speak the truth as plainly andprecisely as we can." Sargent Shriver

Jeffmcleod81

18 May 2013

Good horrorbad videography

Overall the storyline and content of this movie was very good, evenwith the abrupt ending. Some parts of the movie could have beenexpanded and helped to create a terrifying horror film. The mainproblem that I have is with the way that it was filmed. I do realizethat it was in the form of a documentary therefore the third personcamera view. However that doesn't mean that the camera should beconstantly out of focus and bouncing around. (was the cameramansupposed to be very bad at his job? ). I found trying to watch thismovie in the theatre very difficult due to the camera work. I don'tknow if anyone involved with the movie might read this, but if you areplease stop with the constant camera shaking. In well timed situationsto get the mood, no problem. But not the entire movie, it's justnauseating. Other than that as I said in the beginning it was a prettygood film. I'd give it 7/10. If I could have looked at the screen thewhole time but will drop it to 5/10 because of the camera shake.(cloverfield reminiscent).

pahaake

17 May 2013

Superb

First, I have to agree with the other positive reviews. You have tolike this style of film, if you don't then then you shouldn't have goneto see it in the first place.Second, I am a fan of all three PA movies - but I actually found thisone better. The look and feel is somehow more believable. The acting isfar above anything I expected, and even the editing and direction werequite for what this film is.If you enjoy this type of film, it is easily as good as any that camebefore it. Lots of tension, quite a few good surprises, and of course adisappointing ending. But I supposed one that gives the audiencesomething to consider on their way home.

dave-ross390

16 May 2013

good

i watched this film/documentary and regardless others say what a loadof rubbish it wasn't, other was exspecting somethink like paranormalactivity stle but its a film/documentary and i given it full 10/10,from the start to the end the story is good and gets better, Suzancrowley who plays the devil inside plays a very good part and done herhomework as it was done brilliant. if you havet yet seen this i adviseto see it, its now on DVD i believe well so it says on here IMDb so offyou go to the shops and buy it coz you wont be disappointed unless youthink its going to be like what i said paranormal activity. enjoy thefilm and looking forward to reading your reviews if you put any up.

CatJordan1

16 May 2013

Horrible!

As a HUGE fan of scary movies, I have to say this is one of theabsolute worst movies I've ever seen. There's no insult to the actorswho did a fine job. They did the best with the material they had, butthe script was terrible and there was only so much they could do withit.The main fault lies in the terrible storyline. I can appreciate most"cliché's" in scary movies, but this was nothing but "Blair WitchProject" meets "Excorcist". Don't waste your time with this one. Thereare plenty of better written movies to watch.Anticipate this one being listed as one of the worst 10 horror/scarymovies, sorry to say.

Finbar realslaber

15 May 2013

Disaster stay away a real bore.

I wish I had looked at the reviews on this site and saved my money. Iwould never have thought that anyone could make such a bad movie. Anytalk of people fainting the only thing I saw were people falling asleepor walking out. In the cinema tonight there was only about 20 people atleast word must be out in this area as to the quality of this film. Thefilm treats the paying public as if they are stupid, the script is fullof contradiction and everyone seems to have an American accent thepriests were concerned the the Vatican would find out about thisunauthorised exorcism (even thought it was being carried out in one ofthe Vatican hospitals). Anyway I wish I could claim back 2 hours of mylife lost in this film.

chrislandahl

13 May 2013

Devil Inside. Rip Off-Run Away doesnt live up to the Hype

The movie, if u want to call it that, ends, and the credits come up,and the entire audience looks at each other, many of whom still havepopcorn left, and say out loud 'that's it??????' They finish take ahandful of popcorn, slurp down their sodas and grumble their way out ofthe theater, feeling heavily cheated by the movie Mongols once again.Was the movie even 80 minutes without credits, not sure, but this onegets the big WTF! Ouch, I feel violated on the way to my car, and thegroup of us, because yes siree bob, we all bought into the hype. Wecaught a spanking on this one, and what's it made so far, 40 or somillion buck-a-roonies. The clever thing it was mostly first week,before word got around just how bad it was. But what made it soun-satisfying I can't quite put my finger on. It started off 'real' orat least felt it, but maybe some of it was forced, the guy who playedthe director in the movie, kept on taking me out of the movie, he wasthe worst. The heavy set priest wasn't bad, but he did lose me onceduring the movie, like he was pushing a little, definitely missed oneor two of his moments, but overall he wasn't bad, not an easy role, andthe skinnier priest, main girl and mother did their jobs, in the end Ifelt the director character was painful to watch and everyone else goodto really good. Was that guy the director of the movie and he puthimself in the movie? Just the same, what was the problem, why waseveryone in the theater so let down when the end credits popped up? Whythe so many "That's it?" rumbles. Is it that the third act just becamepoop and ended without proper resolve, or really any at all. Not sure,but left the theater very unsatisfied and there was a lot of good scaryelements, and not bad acting, what happened. I guess overall, the moviejust missed. I wouldn't recommend this one at all.

demetrius11

12 May 2013

I stopped watching ten minutes before the ending...

I believe that my summary tells everything there is to say about thisfilm! I read some of the reviews here before watching the film, and Idid not mind that it was described as "slow". As a matter of fact, Ibelieve that slow films sometimes build up the psychological "terror"and they are much more successful than "fast" horror films ! Anyways,this particular film has nothing to offer. No slow psychologicalclimax, no fast splatter horror, no acting, no direction, andabsolutely nothing in general...the director one day decided to makesome money, so he put together some cliché scenes from several movies,and made this low budget production. Personally I feel sad every time Isee another of these terrible movies that appear by the dozen in the"big screen" for the past few years.

M K

06 May 2013

More laughs than screams

Just came back from a screening in downtown Toronto, and I didn't havehigh expectations. Needless to say, I was correct. The folks were literally laughing outloud and there were barely about 3 or 4 "frighting" scenes. The movieit self had a few jokes, I guess nothing to laugh AT the movie, butmore like with the movie, but it doesn't do well when they are tryingto 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, themovie isn't even that long! If you can skip this, do it. You won't miss anything.

06 May 2013

A new kind of Pygmalion

Beautiful. Cruel. And precise. Exercise of pain definition and scienceto build a story in many nuances. To create stories as parts of acloth. An Exorcist, off course, but more classic. Maybe, for tellPygmalion story, it is necessary an old recipes.But the ingredients aresame and that is important. For atmosphere and for final strange happyend. For the pieces of unique statue. For the strange and enticinghypothesis.In fact, tale about love and hate. At different levels.About another doctor Frankenstein and oppression of past. About curefor old events and ambition of a scientist for who revenge is goodinstrument. A slice of way to solve crisis. A game in which role ofvictim is ambiguous. And a precious cast. That is all!

Hellmant

02 May 2013

The Devil Inside Movie Marketing!

'THE DEVIL INSIDE': Three Stars (Out of Five) Hugely successful (financially) low budget horror film about a youngwoman in Italy investigating what happened to her mother when shebrutally murdered three people during her exorcism ten years earlier.The film was directed by William Brent Bell and written by MatthewPeterman (the same team that did the 2006 B horror film 'STAY ALIVE').The movie stars a cast of unknowns including Fernanda Andrade, SimonQuarterman, Evan Helmuth, Ionut Grama and Suzan Crowley (who isoutstanding in the film). The film has some classic frightening momentsand images and is almost so bad it's good but it's mostly just bad.The film is another 'found footage' fake documentary-style horror film.It begins in 1989 when Maria Rossi (Crowley) murders three peopleattempting to perform an exorcism on her. She's placed in a Catholicpsychiatric hospital in Rome. The movie then flashes forward twentyyears when Maria's daughter Isabella (Andrade) is making a documentaryon exorcisms and what happened to her mother. She travels to Rome andenlists the help of two rogue priests (Quarterman and Helmuth) on hermission to discover the truth.The movie cost $1 million to make and has made over $101 million intheaters alone. It had a huge opening weekend though and then droppedoff severely as bad word of mouth spread. Audiences and film fans alikehave widely hated the movie. Which goes to show marketing is everythingto a film's success. That's why the film is one of the most profitablefilm successes of all time and 'JOHN CARTER' is one of the leastprofitable. Despite it mostly being bad I have to give 'THE DEVILINSIDE' some credit. It does have some truly memorable and horrifyingimagery (that's why it did so well) and B horror films like this aresupposed to be bad!Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioQaCI5Qk34

HorrorCreepshow

01 May 2013

Found footage thrillers offers little thrills!

I'll be the first to admit that I loathe the found footage subgenrewith all my heart. The movies are always goofy, annoying, and couldhave been made by any 4th grader with their parent's video camera. Theytake no real skill to execute and I've yet to see a good one. BlairWitch, Paranormal Activity, etc. all bored me to tears and made me wishthey'd discover a tripod instead of the cause of all that strange noiselate at night.So, right here, you might want to stop reading if you love foundfootage movies. I know I would. Still, even for a subgenre I detest,The Devil Inside might easily take the cake as the worst one I've seenthroughout this whole cycle (which should be due for a vacation any daynow).The acting is abysmal, the scares non-existent, the camera-work isappalling, everything just adds up to a horrible experience at themovies. This is bottom of the barrel, Wal-Mart bargain bin materialhere. How it ever got a theatrical release is beyond me. I don't eventhink this could scare a 4 year old child. Some of the imagery, when isolated from the context of film, could beconsidered spooky. Hell, that's why the trailers have been generatingbuzz. It has more gore and naughty language than most of the otherExorcist rip-offs of recent years, but that doesn't add anything whenthe script is so dull and unscary to begin with.A waste of time, a waste of money! Skip it! Not even worth a rental!

zard-man

20 April 2013

Laughing all the way to the bank.

Before saying anything, let me point out I watch all films with an openmind, and normally I can enjoy a film regardless of how technicallypoor it is.This however, was a farce. I honestly can't believe this film gotreleased into theatres, scene after scene was a regurgitation of scenesthat we've all seen before. Not just individual scenes, but the wholetone of the film was so familiar and dull.I didn't take count, but after a noticeable amount of times of the datebeing shot at me with a low dong was laughable, the bloke who made itmust've watched paranormal activity and thought "ooh that was good,I'll have that... then I'll grossly over use it" There was nothing newabout any of the exorcism scenes, apart from it was with a hand heldcamera.. wow. just watch the exorcist and shake the TV around.I felt like i was watching an awful, pretentious student film from theoutset and most of the acting had me cringing in my seat. I literallyhave never seen a worse all round acting display in my life... it wasjust totally unacceptable. They were trying so hard to make it look'real' or 'genuine' and it just looked pathetic, so many face headscratching 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 obviouslyintended) you know when a film is so bad its kind of entertaining? wellthis is just offensive. It was shameful. I can't think of one redeemingquality.DO NOT SPEND MONEY ON THIS FILM

e_v88

19 April 2013

I want my money back

What is up with fake documentaries? More importantly what is up withfake documentaries with shaky cameras missing their endings? 2 peoplewalked out within the first 5 minutes and a few others left during themovie as well. (I wish I would have left) A shaky camera and acontortionist do not make a horror film. The commercials IMO aremisleading. The scary blind nun plays no role in the movie, she is only a passer byon the street once. The crazy cuts and scary scenes you see in thecommercial are basically the movie. There is nothing new in this filmthat hasn't been done multiple times. It's also only an hour and 20minutes long. I don't know why they cut it short since it's lacking anending and only sparks more confusion. The mother only has about 3small cameos as well which is disappointing since she was the only truehighlight to the movie. It has it's required shock/gore scenes but is lacking on story. Itdoesn't have the chill effect of Paranormal or a strong story/characterdevelopment like The Others or Constantine. Knowing it's fake makes itseem like a badly told ghost story. No one in Dayton, Ohio at the 9showing seemed to like it, we all left the theater talking about how itwas a complete waste. I do not recommend this movie, wait for it tocome to Red Box and rent it as a last resort.

MikesIDhasbeentaken

09 April 2013

another exorcism film failure...

will there ever be another decent possession \ exorcism film everagain?or are we bound to watch the same old rubbish over and over again? If,like me, you were disappointed by films like the exorcism of emilyrose, the last exorcist, and the rite, don't think that it gets anybetter here, I think these films are actually getting worse. Moreeffort goes into the advert to make the film look good, than actuallyputting any effort into the film itself.Spoiler to save you from watching the film: ... not much happens for100 minutes, then they all die in a car crash, credits roll.watch the original exorcist film instead, even if it's for the tenthtime, it's better than watching this

ajbarrack

08 April 2013

Love it or hate it. Simple as that.

*Very minor spoiler. This is my first review. Have mercy.Important note before I begin:The problem I see with people watching movies like "The Devil Inside"is that they go in restless expecting people to twist into knots andget ripped apart with nonstop action. This is not that movie. I walkedinto the theater just wanting to be entertained and simply put, I was.What I find to be necessary in slower movies like this is to letyourself become absorbed in the story rather than trying to poke holesin the story and critique it as you watch it. I let myself be absorbedby the film and that is the perspective I will review it from.Review:This faux documentary centers around a girl who all but witnessed hermother murder three people in what is later discovered to be anexorcism. Obsessed with finding out the truth of that night, sheembarks on a trip to Rome with her filmmaking counterpart in order todocument their adventure into the dark world of exorcisms, and whatthey find is disgusting, shocking and grotesque in a few instances, butyou just can't look away. What the director has done here, is try tobalance dialogue with action... a risky deviation from most horrorfilms. The dialogue is a bit slow sometimes, but it is never off topicand keeps the story moving while giving a little more depth to eachcharacter after each sequence. Now don't mistake what I am saying...the screenplay is far from revolutionary, but it is a good start. Thedialogue can be a bit cheesy certainly not helped by periods oflackluster acting, but as a whole, the film did not disappoint. A good exorcism movie is hard to make simply because the viewer knowsthe stereotype and no one has yet to deviate from it yet. This movietried in its own way to reinvent the exorcism movie and did in someways, but kept faithful to what we know and appreciate for the mostpart. "The Devil Inside" is not the action movie to go see with a bunch offriends. This is a movie best seen quietly. Take it in. Try not to pickapart every detail and your movie-going experience will dramaticallyimprove for this movie. I give it a solid 7/10. I left entertained andfrankly a little freaked out. Exactly what a good horror movie shouldleave you with.

darleneshadow

06 April 2013

It did its job

I expect one thing out of a horror movie. I expect it to scare me.Whether it makes me jump and scream and scare my poor cat or it justmakes me afraid to go to bed in my basement at night I am happy. If ahorror movie does one of both of these things it was worth watching.This movie succeeded in at in at least one count so I give it a thumbsup. Yes, I would watch it again and probably will. I also likedCloverfield and all 3 of the Paranormal Activity movies. I did like TheLast Exorcism better than this one I think, but if you have seen thatalready then this is similar, and worth watching. It is the same styleas all these movies. If you have a problem with the jerky motion inthese kinds of films then don't watch them. Chronicle is the same wayso avoid it too. If you don't like being scared or creeped out, DON'TWATCH HORROR MOVIES! If you are all about plot and characterdevelopment again wrong genre for you. Horror movies are meant tohorrify and this does it.

Kristine

06 April 2013

Devils food cake is scarier than this

Movies about demonic possession have been around for a very long time,some are terrifying, some are horrible. I saw the trailer for The DevilInside when I went to see Paranormal Activity 3 and the whole audiencewas screaming, I have to admit that it gave me the chills too. Eventhough it looked a little silly, there were some genuinely creepymoments. So I saw this yesterday and despite all the bad reviews I wasreally curious to see what this movie was about and to give it a fairchance and may I say that the bad reviews are very justified. Not tosay that this is the worst film I have ever seen, but I am getting sickof the "lost footage" genre, we know it's all fake so why bother tryingto make us believe that it's real? Though the one thing I really givethe film credit for is that it tried something different by making itinto a documentary type of movie, which was really cool and I lovedthat it looked at both the scientific and religious side of demonicpossession, giving the viewer a reason to question what was real andwhat was possibly a mental illness. However the slow pace of the creepsand the scares leads into one of the worst endings in movie history.Maria Rossi committed a triple murder during an exorcism performed onher. The Catholic Church became involved, and she has since been in aCatholic psychiatric hospital in Rome. Her daughter, Isabella, learnedof the murders from her father, who died three days after telling her.Twenty years later, Isabella is in the process of filming a documentaryabout exorcisms, and to find out more about her mother, she visits aschool in Rome that deals with exorcisms and enters a classroom wherestudents, priests and scientists are having a discussion about whetheror not a subject is possessed by a demon or just has a mentalcondition. She has dinner with a few students and ends up getting alittle closer with two priests, Ben and David. They talk more about thedifferences between being possessed and mental illnesses, and informIsabella that they can't explain the differences, it's something you"just know". On that note, Ben and David are operating outside of theChurch and performing exorcisms to help patients. Isabllea then decidesthey are the perfect duo to help her mom, but they may have bitten morethan they can chew when they accept.If you make a film about demonic possession, offer something new thatwe haven't seen before. I'm not talking about just the contorted bodiesand talking in tongues, but they offer something great with a demonthat could jump from body to body just terrorizing every human…but thenafter this great idea and making you want even more, they pull the rugout from under you. Also, when did the demons get such a potty mouth?Taking a page from The Exorcist? The film does copy off of previouspossession films which makes it not as original. The characters areunbelievable and not sympathetic so you don't care about what happensto them. Why would a family put their possessed daughter in the creepybasement locked up? Why after a priest tries to drown a baby during abaptism he's able to just walk out of the church? And why in these lostfootage films do people during critical times always grab a camera?There are some good little scares with the mother who the film issomewhat centered around with her possession, what a chillingperformance. However with a horrible ending, the movie is just ruined.The audience comes wanting to be entertained, not feel like they justgot slapped in the face as the director is counting their moneylaughing to the bank.2/10

stan-2009

02 April 2013

Poor shaky cam done on the cheap with almost no plot.

There is very little to review about this so called motion picture.Well it's certainly motion, the worst shaky cam I have seen so far. Itwill probably appeal to the teens, but if you are adult and have anystandards of quality, you will want to stay well clear of this one. Thetrailer is cleverly put together and the title is catchy, other thanthat, it's only saving grace is that it's short in length. The dialogueis laughable in most places, of which was proved by the giggles thatsurrounded the theatre when the devil inside made it's vocalexpressions. The audience actually booed when the sudden but thankfulclosing credits appeared.

Josh Redcay

02 April 2013

Great if youre into exorcisms, not so much if youre looking for a big scare

While this movie isn't anywhere close to the intense, heart-wrenching,horrifying, and goose-bump-inducing movie "The Exorcist", it still hasa place in the exorcist movie world.I really think they went in the right direction when they decided tomake it a documentary-type way of filming (much like the ParanormalActivity series). I think it really helps to add to the realism.Now on the other hand, I would NOT recommend this movie to anyone whois looking for a really big scare. It never gave me that intense andheart-wrenching feeling that I got while watching movies like "TheExorcist" and "Paranormal Activity". It kind of seems to just beataround the bush the entire movie, in a sense.The worst part of the entire movie, in my opinion, was the ending.After the movie was over, I had a feeling of absolute emptiness. Theycould have, at the very least, showed what happened to Maria Rossi. Didthe demon really leave her? Was she back to normal? Did they survivethe car accident? Yes, I'm sure many people are saying "Well it was acreative and non-cliché ending". While that may be true, you can make acreative ending without leaving so much out. This was probably theworst ending I've ever seen in a movie that started with so muchpotential. I just felt I never got that really enormous scare that Iwas waiting for.The bottom line, this movie has so much potential, but I feel it neverfully utilizes it, and in the end you leave feeling empty. On the otherhand, it does have some really cool information on exorcisms, and somereally awesome acting to go with it. There were some really dramaticand intense scenes. I really felt like they were really in thatsituation and that they weren't even acting at all. Not to mention theway it was presented was really top-notch. Like I said, this movie hasa ton of potential, but it seems to just simply fizzle out. I believeit can be enjoyed non-the-less. Although if you want to get a scare outof it, I suggest watching it alone!