The Devil Inside (2012)
User ReviewsAdd a Review
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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")
The movie itself is about a woman who discovered her mother was involved in an exorcism and was shipped out to Rome, Italy afterward and she goes to discover why and look for some answers.
Things all go downhill for her from there.
The movie's acting and story are great I had no issues whatsoever with it there. You could tell it seems a tad amateurish in terms of their acting at times but I still thought everyone did well in it.
The story and scary scenes were all great, I've seen a number of these styles of movies, Quite a lot more then the average watcher and this one while it won't give me nightmares at night it still delivered a few very solid and tense scenes. I was a bit let down by the ending though and that was my only issue I had with the whole film.
The make-up and dialogue were all very good too and at times during some of the exorcisms it almost reminded me a little bit of the original exorcism which you can tell the film makers had a lot of influence from that.
My only qualms against this movie were that there could have been more scary scenes and I wished for a better ending. That said though the scary scenes that were there were very nicely done!
I have a feeling this movie will get a lot of hate because of its mockumentary style of filming which is not very Hollywood like of horror movies so I feel a lot of people will dislike it for that but if you're in the mood for a horror that's got a dark realistic tone to it then by all means give it a go and you shouldn't be disappointed.
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
The ingredients for a horror film that serves up its fair share of scares are all inside this effort. There's Rome, there're demonic possessions, there's creepy sound effects and shadow and light play, jump scares, quick cuts, the works, although given that it's of the found footage genre one really cannot complain about the jerky and shaky camera-work that could get a little bit nauseating. It begins with a mystery, where a woman got makes a call to the police confessing having to kill 3 persons, only for us to slowly realize through newsreels that it was three persons involved in an exorcism on the woman who had turned tables around.
We then fast forward to the woman's daughter Isabella (Fernanda Andrade) who decides to go solve the mystery behind her mother's deeds, who is now locked up in the Vatican's appointed hospital for psychiatry. A documentary crew she conveniently commissions follows her to Rome, where she meets up with the priests Ben (Simon Quarterman) and David (Evan Helmuth) who soon bring her to experience one of their exorcisms performed on a woman called Rosalita (Bonnie Morgan), where the episode serves as a jump point and catalyst for everything else in the movie to follow on at breakneck speed, with the usual inputs that you'd already come to see in countless of exorcist type movies, and develops with a hint of what's being known as transference.
There are a couple of open, unresolved subplots that have opened the doors for prequels and sequels to happen, although whether or not these will be done is a huge question given the very large backlash. For instance, the back-story of Ben was kept very ambiguous, as is Isabella's, both having done something that could either be revealed to be more than meets the eye, or expanded for a little bit more depth. The build up toward the final act was great, because it created such a huge expectation that the stunt it pulled off in the last scene is admittedly very ballsy, although it got a reaction opposite of what it expected to be rewarded for having the guts to be different, pulling the plug and denying everyone a climatic battle to the finish.
Many will fault the film for that, and probably bear a grudge to condemn everything else that transpired in the film, which to me feels a little bit unfair. It decided to do what it set out to, and reminded everyone again of going back to basics for the sub-genre - something has to happen in some fashion like this for the found-footage itself to work. It is found after all, and inherently that calls for things to be left hanging, logically speaking. I have to credit the film too for being the only one I've seen so far in a horror film, where menstrual blood got spewed from the source and found reason to be splattered all over the camera. Talk about morbidity when you least expected it, in the most gooey fashion the filmmakers conjured.
For what got invested in production, the box office returns already made this a success, thanks to horror film aficionados who contributed to its coffers early in its release, before word of mouth slowly condemned it to fall quite spectacularly at the charts. Still, those looking for some scares will find The Devil Inside serving them up, but you'll just have to hold on to your horses at its ending - if you're open minded enough it's something you won't condemn immediately, especially if you take a step back to consider its few production and narrative merits.
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.
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
Second, I am a fan of all three PA movies - but I actually found this one better. The look and feel is somehow more believable. The acting is far above anything I expected, and even the editing and direction were quite for what this film is.
If you enjoy this type of film, it is easily as good as any that came before it. Lots of tension, quite a few good surprises, and of course a disappointing ending. But I supposed one that gives the audience something to consider on their way home.