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.
322 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.
A Noisy and Disappointing Home Video of Bad Quality
claudio_carvalho22 May 2012
Warning: Spoilers
On 30 October 1989, in South Hartford, Maria Rossi (Suzan Crowley) brutally murders two priests and a nun during an exorcism and calls the police. Two years later, she is arrested and sentenced to the South Hartford State Asylum. However, a couple of months later, she is transferred to the Centrino Mental Hospital in Italy.
Twenty years later, her twenty-five years old daughter Isabella Rossi (Fernanda Andrade) accepts to make a documentary about her mother and she travels to the Vatican School of Exorcism in Rome. Isabella befriends the priests Father Ben Rawlings (Simon Quarterman) and Father David Keane (Evan Helmuth) in the school. Then she visits her mother with the director Michael Schaefer (Ionut Grama) that is shooting the documentary.
The two priests invite Isabella and Michael to witness the exorcism of a young woman. Then they go to the hospital where Maria Rossi is interned to exorcise her. Father David shows the evidences to the Church and Maria's doctor but they are not accepted. Sooner Father David is possessed by a demon and commits suicide. Isabella has a seizure and Ben and Michael take her to the hospital. Sooner they learn that Isabelle is possessed by a demon and they need to take her to Father Gallo to help Ben in an exorcism.
"The Devil Inside" is a noisy and disappointing home video of bad quality with another story of exorcism. The acting is not bad, with the Brazilian Fernanda Andrade in the lead role; but after the original "The Blair Witch Project", the documentary "style" using a Handycam has become the favorite of people that wants to make a cheap film. The conclusion is absolutely disappointing. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "A Filha do Mal" ("The Daughter of the Evil")
Twenty years later, her twenty-five years old daughter Isabella Rossi (Fernanda Andrade) accepts to make a documentary about her mother and she travels to the Vatican School of Exorcism in Rome. Isabella befriends the priests Father Ben Rawlings (Simon Quarterman) and Father David Keane (Evan Helmuth) in the school. Then she visits her mother with the director Michael Schaefer (Ionut Grama) that is shooting the documentary.
The two priests invite Isabella and Michael to witness the exorcism of a young woman. Then they go to the hospital where Maria Rossi is interned to exorcise her. Father David shows the evidences to the Church and Maria's doctor but they are not accepted. Sooner Father David is possessed by a demon and commits suicide. Isabella has a seizure and Ben and Michael take her to the hospital. Sooner they learn that Isabelle is possessed by a demon and they need to take her to Father Gallo to help Ben in an exorcism.
"The Devil Inside" is a noisy and disappointing home video of bad quality with another story of exorcism. The acting is not bad, with the Brazilian Fernanda Andrade in the lead role; but after the original "The Blair Witch Project", the documentary "style" using a Handycam has become the favorite of people that wants to make a cheap film. The conclusion is absolutely disappointing. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "A Filha do Mal" ("The Daughter of the Evil")
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
Devil's food cake is scarier than this
Smells_Like_Cheese10 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Movies about demonic possession have been around for a very long time, some are terrifying, some are horrible. I saw the trailer for The Devil Inside when I went to see Paranormal Activity 3 and the whole audience was screaming, I have to admit that it gave me the chills too. Even though it looked a little silly, there were some genuinely creepy moments. So I saw this yesterday and despite all the bad reviews I was really curious to see what this movie was about and to give it a fair chance and may I say that the bad reviews are very justified. Not to say that this is the worst film I have ever seen, but I am getting sick of the "lost footage" genre, we know it's all fake so why bother trying to make us believe that it's real? Though the one thing I really give the film credit for is that it tried something different by making it into a documentary type of movie, which was really cool and I loved that it looked at both the scientific and religious side of demonic possession, giving the viewer a reason to question what was real and what was possibly a mental illness. However the slow pace of the creeps and the scares leads into one of the worst endings in movie history.
Maria Rossi committed a triple murder during an exorcism performed on her. The Catholic Church became involved, and she has since been in a Catholic psychiatric hospital in Rome. Her daughter, Isabella, learned of the murders from her father, who died three days after telling her. Twenty years later, Isabella is in the process of filming a documentary about exorcisms, and to find out more about her mother, she visits a school in Rome that deals with exorcisms and enters a classroom where students, priests and scientists are having a discussion about whether or not a subject is possessed by a demon or just has a mental condition. She has dinner with a few students and ends up getting a little closer with two priests, Ben and David. They talk more about the differences between being possessed and mental illnesses, and inform Isabella that they can't explain the differences, it's something you "just know". On that note, Ben and David are operating outside of the Church and performing exorcisms to help patients. Isabllea then decides they are the perfect duo to help her mom, but they may have bitten more than they can chew when they accept.
If you make a film about demonic possession, offer something new that we haven't seen before. I'm not talking about just the contorted bodies and talking in tongues, but they offer something great with a demon that could jump from body to body just terrorizing every human but then after this great idea and making you want even more, they pull the rug out 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 previous possession films which makes it not as original. The characters are unbelievable and not sympathetic so you don't care about what happens to them. Why would a family put their possessed daughter in the creepy basement locked up? Why after a priest tries to drown a baby during a baptism he's able to just walk out of the church? And why in these lost footage films do people during critical times always grab a camera? There are some good little scares with the mother who the film is somewhat centered around with her possession, what a chilling performance. However with a horrible ending, the movie is just ruined. The audience comes wanting to be entertained, not feel like they just got slapped in the face as the director is counting their money laughing to the bank.
2/10
Maria Rossi committed a triple murder during an exorcism performed on her. The Catholic Church became involved, and she has since been in a Catholic psychiatric hospital in Rome. Her daughter, Isabella, learned of the murders from her father, who died three days after telling her. Twenty years later, Isabella is in the process of filming a documentary about exorcisms, and to find out more about her mother, she visits a school in Rome that deals with exorcisms and enters a classroom where students, priests and scientists are having a discussion about whether or not a subject is possessed by a demon or just has a mental condition. She has dinner with a few students and ends up getting a little closer with two priests, Ben and David. They talk more about the differences between being possessed and mental illnesses, and inform Isabella that they can't explain the differences, it's something you "just know". On that note, Ben and David are operating outside of the Church and performing exorcisms to help patients. Isabllea then decides they are the perfect duo to help her mom, but they may have bitten more than they can chew when they accept.
If you make a film about demonic possession, offer something new that we haven't seen before. I'm not talking about just the contorted bodies and talking in tongues, but they offer something great with a demon that could jump from body to body just terrorizing every human but then after this great idea and making you want even more, they pull the rug out 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 previous possession films which makes it not as original. The characters are unbelievable and not sympathetic so you don't care about what happens to them. Why would a family put their possessed daughter in the creepy basement locked up? Why after a priest tries to drown a baby during a baptism he's able to just walk out of the church? And why in these lost footage films do people during critical times always grab a camera? There are some good little scares with the mother who the film is somewhat centered around with her possession, what a chilling performance. However with a horrible ending, the movie is just ruined. The audience comes wanting to be entertained, not feel like they just got slapped in the face as the director is counting their money laughing to the bank.
2/10
Good story. Would love to see a sequel.
jack_face6 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
The movie is only about an hour and 15 minutes. Nothing after the credits and the credits are the slowest scrolling credits I've ever seen in my life. My assumption is that it scrolled so slowly because there weren't a lot of people who worked on the film (since the cast was small and budget was low) and they didn't want the run time to be so short as to devalue the movie and discourage people from paying to see it; thinking they wouldn't get much bang for the buck. I guess they had to do something to extend it and this is what they chose.
It's filmed in a found footage/documentary style that works for the movie. It doesn't use too many cheap or jump scares. The only bad acting belonged to the chick who played Isabella Rossi. The most important character in the entire movie is actually the person filming everything named Michael and he gets the least amount of face time and dialogue. None of the footage would even exist if he wasn't filming. Therefore, without him, no movie. He does express that during an MTV's Real World type confessional. There actually is a story here. It's not just a bunch of things happening on screen with no rhyme or reason. The story itself is very good. I like it. It's not necessarily original but the way the movie ends, if there is a sequel, it would have to be filmed in a more traditional movie-making style. That means no found footage. I just gave something away if you're paying attention.
There are intentional holes left in the movie that can only be answered with a sequel. Like Maria Rossi's possession. Why was she chosen to be possessed, why did the demon who possessed her make her do what she did, and which demon possessed her? I think exorcism as a whole could be explored more since part of the theme of this movie is the law surrounding the act of exorcism and how it needs to change. Another theme is distinguishing between mental illness and possession; a separation of science and religion. I liked what they were doing here by exploring other aspects of an overused genre but all the questions weren't answered. That's not a bad thing. A different twist is similar to what was done in the movie Fallen and that concept was explained during the movie.
If you're gonna see this, and I'd give this a thumbs up to see it, then go when there's gonna be less people in the auditorium or see it at a reputable theater and that's what I recommend for every movie anyway. This movie ain't worth full price. Catch a matinée or half price or something. Dollar movie works too. It's worth seeing in theaters.
This movie didn't back down on violence. Just when I thought they weren't gonna show certain things, they showed it and I appreciated that. No watering down here although I believe some brief nudity in one scene would have added to the realism. This also reminds me of REC but this isn't anywhere near as good as that. REC, when watched under the right conditions, will stay with you for a while. It burns an image into your head that doesn't go away and that's what a good horror movie is supposed to do: make you look over your shoulder and around corners and through shower curtains and keeps you awake at night. REC does just that and gives a compelling story. This also has a good story that I'd really like to see continued if it makes enough money because, similar to REC, it appears there's something bigger going on and this first installment only scratches the surface. It teases more and I believe it can deliver with a second movie.
The way the movie ends, there was a collective sigh of disappointment. It leaves you wanting more and since that's what made people disappointed, I'd say it did its job. It also makes you wonder because there is something that happens in that last scene and you don't know who the survivor is. That's all I'll say about that. The last scene was unique and a bit funny given the circumstances, I'll give it that much. It was original. If that last survivor is who it should be, then we have a sequel if they ever make it and I'd love to see it at an equal or better level of quality. No complaints about the special effects which weren't that many to begin with. I give this 7 out of 10 stars. Not a bad movie. Worth seeing. Not too scary but I'm sure some people will be affected by certain scenes because it doesn't use too many tricks to get the job done. It has a very creepy scene that affects you as if you were watching the movie Session 9. It's short but effective and that describes the entire movie. Just make sure to watch this with the right people in the right environment.
It's filmed in a found footage/documentary style that works for the movie. It doesn't use too many cheap or jump scares. The only bad acting belonged to the chick who played Isabella Rossi. The most important character in the entire movie is actually the person filming everything named Michael and he gets the least amount of face time and dialogue. None of the footage would even exist if he wasn't filming. Therefore, without him, no movie. He does express that during an MTV's Real World type confessional. There actually is a story here. It's not just a bunch of things happening on screen with no rhyme or reason. The story itself is very good. I like it. It's not necessarily original but the way the movie ends, if there is a sequel, it would have to be filmed in a more traditional movie-making style. That means no found footage. I just gave something away if you're paying attention.
There are intentional holes left in the movie that can only be answered with a sequel. Like Maria Rossi's possession. Why was she chosen to be possessed, why did the demon who possessed her make her do what she did, and which demon possessed her? I think exorcism as a whole could be explored more since part of the theme of this movie is the law surrounding the act of exorcism and how it needs to change. Another theme is distinguishing between mental illness and possession; a separation of science and religion. I liked what they were doing here by exploring other aspects of an overused genre but all the questions weren't answered. That's not a bad thing. A different twist is similar to what was done in the movie Fallen and that concept was explained during the movie.
If you're gonna see this, and I'd give this a thumbs up to see it, then go when there's gonna be less people in the auditorium or see it at a reputable theater and that's what I recommend for every movie anyway. This movie ain't worth full price. Catch a matinée or half price or something. Dollar movie works too. It's worth seeing in theaters.
This movie didn't back down on violence. Just when I thought they weren't gonna show certain things, they showed it and I appreciated that. No watering down here although I believe some brief nudity in one scene would have added to the realism. This also reminds me of REC but this isn't anywhere near as good as that. REC, when watched under the right conditions, will stay with you for a while. It burns an image into your head that doesn't go away and that's what a good horror movie is supposed to do: make you look over your shoulder and around corners and through shower curtains and keeps you awake at night. REC does just that and gives a compelling story. This also has a good story that I'd really like to see continued if it makes enough money because, similar to REC, it appears there's something bigger going on and this first installment only scratches the surface. It teases more and I believe it can deliver with a second movie.
The way the movie ends, there was a collective sigh of disappointment. It leaves you wanting more and since that's what made people disappointed, I'd say it did its job. It also makes you wonder because there is something that happens in that last scene and you don't know who the survivor is. That's all I'll say about that. The last scene was unique and a bit funny given the circumstances, I'll give it that much. It was original. If that last survivor is who it should be, then we have a sequel if they ever make it and I'd love to see it at an equal or better level of quality. No complaints about the special effects which weren't that many to begin with. I give this 7 out of 10 stars. Not a bad movie. Worth seeing. Not too scary but I'm sure some people will be affected by certain scenes because it doesn't use too many tricks to get the job done. It has a very creepy scene that affects you as if you were watching the movie Session 9. It's short but effective and that describes the entire movie. Just make sure to watch this with the right people in the right environment.
Worst movie ever
bret_phaneuf26 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Went to see this movie with my girlfriend. We went to the Thursday midnight opening. She has been wanting to watch it for awhile from seeing the previews. I had a bad feeling about it when we started watching and I had Blair Witch flashbacks coming into play. The Maria Rossi character was about the only thing I thought was remotely played out well. Save yourself some money and don't bother going to watch this movie. Oh, and virtually everyone booed at the ending of movies.
Please take my advice and don't waste your money. What more can I say about how bad this movie is to fill up 10 lines of text to get my review in. It was so bad I bothered to setup an account just so I could make a bad review of it.
Please take my advice and don't waste your money. What more can I say about how bad this movie is to fill up 10 lines of text to get my review in. It was so bad I bothered to setup an account just so I could make a bad review of it.
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.
This movie absolutely deserves an advocate
dp19297 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I think everyone is giving this movie a bum wrap. Yeah, it didn't have an amazing ending, and in all honesty, I don't know a lot of horrors that do have successful or satisfying endings. I really don't think they are the primary concern of this genre, and if they are, they're the difference between 7/10 and 10/10 stars.
The fact is, this was a creepy movie. I was legitimately upset watching it. I think they did a great job of incorporating claustrophobia with the completely unpredictable mother, it was very uncomfortable and I was impressed. Were the characters any good? decent enough for me, when are characters ever really that brilliant in horrors? Again, it's not my primary concern, I go with the hope of being scared and this movie was more successful than I'm used to in that sense.
I was also very impressed with how well they shattered the sense of safety in the movie. The demons were running wild, they made significant development jumping between people and they were totally unpredictable. They were always initially restrained and they were always too strong to be held back.
My only real complaint: I'm tired of the documentary style horrors. Yeah, maybe they would have been better off ending the movie 2 minutes earlier. I don't care, I'll get over it.
The fact is, this was a creepy movie. I was legitimately upset watching it. I think they did a great job of incorporating claustrophobia with the completely unpredictable mother, it was very uncomfortable and I was impressed. Were the characters any good? decent enough for me, when are characters ever really that brilliant in horrors? Again, it's not my primary concern, I go with the hope of being scared and this movie was more successful than I'm used to in that sense.
I was also very impressed with how well they shattered the sense of safety in the movie. The demons were running wild, they made significant development jumping between people and they were totally unpredictable. They were always initially restrained and they were always too strong to be held back.
My only real complaint: I'm tired of the documentary style horrors. Yeah, maybe they would have been better off ending the movie 2 minutes earlier. I don't care, I'll get over it.
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.
Did I see the same movie that you guys did?
castathinshadow7777 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
First off, I'm not a 15 year old girl who just saw her first scary movie. Second, I really enjoy the intimacy and tone of found footage movies.
I am shocked to see so many negative reviews about this movie. The trailer was not misleading? I'm confused about some of the negative hype. If you are saying there is no real ending to this movie, or that you don't understand, you need to see the movie again. It very clearly explains itself. I really enjoyed the ending. I really don't like hype, but I gave into it when people started posting the trailer everywhere. When it came out, and I saw all the negative reviews, I immediately lowered my standards. This movie did not disappoint.
This is not a big budget thriller. If you want another cheesy movie with hot naked girls running away from serial killers, go watch Hostel. It may not be strikingly original, but I found the tone to be very scary. If you want to see the another Academy Award worthy film with amazing dialogue and special effects, go see something else.
It is very rare that a movie gets my adrenaline going. You have to remember that this is supposed to be a documentary that takes place in the time span of a couple months, not a narrative about someone's life. You have to use your imagination to get into the style of film. I guess some people don't have imaginations anymore.
I found the jump scenes to be quite frequent and valid to the story, although one jump scene with a dog comes at a random time in the movie, and has nothing to do with the storyline.
There is more gore than I anticipated, which is a plus. I feel like they fit it into the movie very well. Senseless, randomly placed gore in a film shows me that the creators are trying too hard. The special effects were not overdone. The exorcism scenes were quite disturbing, unlike what others may be saying.
The story takes a turn when after the exorcism of the lead role Isaballa's mother, the demons transfer to the priest, and eventually Isabella. I guess people are interpreting this as a hole in the story or something, but I thought it was a great turn.
Summary: I'm extremely picky on horror movies, I find most to be either over done or really generic. This one got me. I am a fan of the style of film, although some people are not. This movie will receive low ratings because it's not The Sixth Sense or Insidious, but will end up with a good cult following, seeing as some people do actually care to have a good thrill. If you like Blair Witch, I'd highly recommend this movie. I was NOT disappointed.
I am shocked to see so many negative reviews about this movie. The trailer was not misleading? I'm confused about some of the negative hype. If you are saying there is no real ending to this movie, or that you don't understand, you need to see the movie again. It very clearly explains itself. I really enjoyed the ending. I really don't like hype, but I gave into it when people started posting the trailer everywhere. When it came out, and I saw all the negative reviews, I immediately lowered my standards. This movie did not disappoint.
This is not a big budget thriller. If you want another cheesy movie with hot naked girls running away from serial killers, go watch Hostel. It may not be strikingly original, but I found the tone to be very scary. If you want to see the another Academy Award worthy film with amazing dialogue and special effects, go see something else.
It is very rare that a movie gets my adrenaline going. You have to remember that this is supposed to be a documentary that takes place in the time span of a couple months, not a narrative about someone's life. You have to use your imagination to get into the style of film. I guess some people don't have imaginations anymore.
I found the jump scenes to be quite frequent and valid to the story, although one jump scene with a dog comes at a random time in the movie, and has nothing to do with the storyline.
There is more gore than I anticipated, which is a plus. I feel like they fit it into the movie very well. Senseless, randomly placed gore in a film shows me that the creators are trying too hard. The special effects were not overdone. The exorcism scenes were quite disturbing, unlike what others may be saying.
The story takes a turn when after the exorcism of the lead role Isaballa's mother, the demons transfer to the priest, and eventually Isabella. I guess people are interpreting this as a hole in the story or something, but I thought it was a great turn.
Summary: I'm extremely picky on horror movies, I find most to be either over done or really generic. This one got me. I am a fan of the style of film, although some people are not. This movie will receive low ratings because it's not The Sixth Sense or Insidious, but will end up with a good cult following, seeing as some people do actually care to have a good thrill. If you like Blair Witch, I'd highly recommend this movie. I was NOT disappointed.
Love it or hate it. Simple as that.
ajbarrack6 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
*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 and get ripped apart with nonstop action. This is not that movie. I walked into 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 let yourself become absorbed in the story rather than trying to poke holes in the story and critique it as you watch it. I let myself be absorbed by the film and that is the perspective I will review it from.
Review:
This faux documentary centers around a girl who all but witnessed her mother murder three people in what is later discovered to be an exorcism. Obsessed with finding out the truth of that night, she embarks on a trip to Rome with her filmmaking counterpart in order to document their adventure into the dark world of exorcisms, and what they find is disgusting, shocking and grotesque in a few instances, but you just can't look away. What the director has done here, is try to balance dialogue with action... a risky deviation from most horror films. The dialogue is a bit slow sometimes, but it is never off topic and keeps the story moving while giving a little more depth to each character after each sequence. Now don't mistake what I am saying... the screenplay is far from revolutionary, but it is a good start. The dialogue can be a bit cheesy certainly not helped by periods of lackluster acting, but as a whole, the film did not disappoint.
A good exorcism movie is hard to make simply because the viewer knows the stereotype and no one has yet to deviate from it yet. This movie tried in its own way to reinvent the exorcism movie and did in some ways, but kept faithful to what we know and appreciate for the most part.
"The Devil Inside" is not the action movie to go see with a bunch of friends. This is a movie best seen quietly. Take it in. Try not to pick apart every detail and your movie-going experience will dramatically improve for this movie. I give it a solid 7/10. I left entertained and frankly a little freaked out. Exactly what a good horror movie should leave you with.
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 and get ripped apart with nonstop action. This is not that movie. I walked into 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 let yourself become absorbed in the story rather than trying to poke holes in the story and critique it as you watch it. I let myself be absorbed by the film and that is the perspective I will review it from.
Review:
This faux documentary centers around a girl who all but witnessed her mother murder three people in what is later discovered to be an exorcism. Obsessed with finding out the truth of that night, she embarks on a trip to Rome with her filmmaking counterpart in order to document their adventure into the dark world of exorcisms, and what they find is disgusting, shocking and grotesque in a few instances, but you just can't look away. What the director has done here, is try to balance dialogue with action... a risky deviation from most horror films. The dialogue is a bit slow sometimes, but it is never off topic and keeps the story moving while giving a little more depth to each character after each sequence. Now don't mistake what I am saying... the screenplay is far from revolutionary, but it is a good start. The dialogue can be a bit cheesy certainly not helped by periods of lackluster acting, but as a whole, the film did not disappoint.
A good exorcism movie is hard to make simply because the viewer knows the stereotype and no one has yet to deviate from it yet. This movie tried in its own way to reinvent the exorcism movie and did in some ways, but kept faithful to what we know and appreciate for the most part.
"The Devil Inside" is not the action movie to go see with a bunch of friends. This is a movie best seen quietly. Take it in. Try not to pick apart every detail and your movie-going experience will dramatically improve for this movie. I give it a solid 7/10. I left entertained and frankly a little freaked out. Exactly what a good horror movie should leave you with.
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.
Scary, Innovative and Worth It
bryan-banowetz6 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
"The Devil Inside" focuses on Isabella Rossi as she tries to figure out the mysterious murdering spree of her mother 20 years before. She later finds out that it was during an exorcism that her mother killed three people. After being arrested, Maria Rossi is sent to a mental hospital for the criminally insane in Rome and Isabella travels there to figure out what is wrong with her mother. The problem is more than just a mental illness, but evil itself incarnate in her.
My first thought before seeing this movie was that it was going to be another one of those "exorcism" movies. Turning heads, spider-walking down the stairs...we have all seen them. Before this film, most exorcism flicks just focused on these traits. None of them really discussed the religious aspect in terms of the Roman Catholic Church. I commend "The Devil Inside" for doing this. It really revealed the true inner feelings of the Church on exorcism, especially in today's society. Some people are separated in the idea of exorcism, even the religious people and this film did a great job in conveying this confusion and conflicting views. Mental illness is the panacea diagnosis, but there may be something more.
Honestly, I am not a very big fan of the hand-held camera style. But this movie, overall, did a great job with handling this style. Yes, there were spots where the camera was a little shaky, but it's a given with these kinds of movies. The camera was almost always on the action that was happening at the moment. It didn't try to trick the audience by moving the camera somewhere else while there is a mêlée happening just outside the view of the camera. The fake-documentary style is one of my favorites, mainly because of "The Last Exorcism".
Overall, the plot was very well planned. It was quite an original plot with a unique twist on multiple-demonic possessions. I thought that the plot flowed and didn't drag in any spots. All speaking parts fit in with the action and all discussions explained important aspects necessary to understand the movie.
All in all, this is one of the scariest movies I have seen. Everyone in the movie theater was on the edge of their seats. Yes, the ending was a bit disappointing, but the cliff-hanger was a great way to end this movie. This is a kind of movie that if it ended on a good note, it would have ruined the mood of the whole movie. That shroud of mystery was a perfect touch. I found the ending words that "the case is still being investigated" to be a little cheesy, which is why I gave it 8 stars. But other than that, I would highly recommend that you watch it. It is well worth every penny. Enjoy!
My first thought before seeing this movie was that it was going to be another one of those "exorcism" movies. Turning heads, spider-walking down the stairs...we have all seen them. Before this film, most exorcism flicks just focused on these traits. None of them really discussed the religious aspect in terms of the Roman Catholic Church. I commend "The Devil Inside" for doing this. It really revealed the true inner feelings of the Church on exorcism, especially in today's society. Some people are separated in the idea of exorcism, even the religious people and this film did a great job in conveying this confusion and conflicting views. Mental illness is the panacea diagnosis, but there may be something more.
Honestly, I am not a very big fan of the hand-held camera style. But this movie, overall, did a great job with handling this style. Yes, there were spots where the camera was a little shaky, but it's a given with these kinds of movies. The camera was almost always on the action that was happening at the moment. It didn't try to trick the audience by moving the camera somewhere else while there is a mêlée happening just outside the view of the camera. The fake-documentary style is one of my favorites, mainly because of "The Last Exorcism".
Overall, the plot was very well planned. It was quite an original plot with a unique twist on multiple-demonic possessions. I thought that the plot flowed and didn't drag in any spots. All speaking parts fit in with the action and all discussions explained important aspects necessary to understand the movie.
All in all, this is one of the scariest movies I have seen. Everyone in the movie theater was on the edge of their seats. Yes, the ending was a bit disappointing, but the cliff-hanger was a great way to end this movie. This is a kind of movie that if it ended on a good note, it would have ruined the mood of the whole movie. That shroud of mystery was a perfect touch. I found the ending words that "the case is still being investigated" to be a little cheesy, which is why I gave it 8 stars. But other than that, I would highly recommend that you watch it. It is well worth every penny. Enjoy!
I don't get why everyone hates this movie...
iversondukie10 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
OK people, stop rating movies bad because of the time length and shaky camera. Time length has NOTHING to do with quality and a shaky camera is a "style" of film work. Open your mind a bit! oh and if you don't believe in demons and ghosts, DON'T WATCH THE MOVIES ABOUT DEMONS AND GHOSTS.
This movie is not as good as Emily Rose, but what is?? It's definitely not as bad as a lot of people are making it out to be. My girlfriend and I loved the end because it was different. Someone said it was stupid because the devil was jumping between people. If you payed attention you would have heard the teacher say multiple demons can posses a person and they can jump from person to person. There were FOUR demons in the mother, not one.
I swear movies like Twilight are making people stupid
This movie is not as good as Emily Rose, but what is?? It's definitely not as bad as a lot of people are making it out to be. My girlfriend and I loved the end because it was different. Someone said it was stupid because the devil was jumping between people. If you payed attention you would have heard the teacher say multiple demons can posses a person and they can jump from person to person. There were FOUR demons in the mother, not one.
I swear movies like Twilight are making people stupid
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.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
