Exorcism Movies |

Archive for the Exorcism Movies Category

THIS IS THE END (2013)

Posted in 2013, Apocalyptic Films, Bad Behavior, Comedies, Disaster Films, Exorcism Movies, James Franco, LL Soares Reviews, Possessed By Demons, Post-Apocalypse Movies, R-Rated Comedy, Stoner Comedies with tags apocalypse, Danny McBride, Evan Goldberg, James Franco, Jonah Hill, Seth Rogen, Stoner Comedies, This is the End on June 14, 2013 by knifefighter

THIS IS THE END (2013)
Review by L.L. Soares

Back in the old days, director Roger Corman used to make “quickie” films over the course of a weekend between his regular features. Sometimes he would have the sets for a few more days or an actor might get done with a role early and have some availability (since they signed up for a certain amount of time), and Corman would take advantage of it to make a fast extra film while he still could. Sometimes this resulted in an incomprehensible flick like THE TERROR (1963), and sometimes it resulted in an accidental classic, like LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS (1960).

THIS IS THE END, the new movie by directors and screenwriting partners Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg, was probably not made over the course of a weekend, but it has that kind of feel to it. Like a bunch of friends were sitting around one afternoon and decided “Let’s make a movie!” While it clearly had an actual budget, there’s an “of the moment” aesthetic to the whole thing, some of which works in its favor, and some of which doesn’t. It’s based on a short film called “Jay and Seth vs. the Apocalypse” (2007) which was written by Jason Stone, about actors and friends Jay Baruchel and Seth Rogan confronting the end of the world. Now, it’s been expanded into a feature-length movie.

It features a bunch of actors playing “themselves,” or a facsimile thereof, and what happens when they get caught in the middle of the “End Times.” They’re able to make this concept work because in the movie each person’s personality is well-defined enough so that they can play on that familiarity—even if they exaggerate things a bit—and we get sucked in because we feel that we know these people. Fans of the short-lived TV series FREAKS AND GEEKS (which only lasted one season, from 1999 to 2000) will especially find things to like in the movie. That was the show that put Judd Apatow on the map, as well as giving actors Seth Rogen and James Franco their first big break.

The movie begins with Rogen (KNOCKED UP, 2007 and PINEAPPLE EXPRESS, 2008) meeting Jay Baruchel—who was in another Judd Apatow series, UNDECLARED (2001-2002), and had roles in movies like KNOCKED UP and TROPIC THUNDER, 2008) —at the airport. The two of them are long-time friends who haven’t seen each other in about a year, and they’re trying to kick-start their friendship again. This involves burgers from Carl’s Jr., smoking lots of pot, and playing video games on a new 3D TV. Then Rogen remembers that he was invited to James Franco’s (most recently in OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL, earlier this year) house for a party. Baruchel isn’t too eager; he feels uncomfortable around Rogen’s newer “Hollywood” friends, but he agrees to go.

The party has its own pleasures, one of the biggest being Michael Cera (from SUPERBAD, 2007, SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD, 2010 and the cult TV series ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT) playing himself as a kind of coke-snorting, super-cocky lady’s man. Who knew? Cera is so obnoxious playing “himself,” that he had me laughing out loud several times. He is friggin hilarious. It’s only too bad he’s not in the movie longer. Also at the party are such familiar faces as actress Emma Watson from the HARRY POTTER movies, comic actress Mindy Kaling (from the American version of the TV show THE OFFICE and her new show, THE MINDY PROJECT), singer Rihanna, and, in smaller roles, other FREAKS AND GEEKS alumni, such as Jason Segel and Martin Starr.

While on a trip to a convenience store to pick up some cigarettes, Rogen and Baruchel find themselves in the middle of an earthquake. Or what they think is an earthquake. A bunch of stuff falls on Rogen, so he doesn’t see it, but Baruchel witnesses several customers in the store being zapped by blue beams of light from the sky and sucked up through the store’s ceiling. Back at the party, no one will believe him.

That is, until the next tremor. Then the earth opens up as the mother of all sinkholes suddenly appears in front of Franco’s house, sucking down most of the partygoers into the flaming pits of Hell.

There’s lots of death and destruction, until just a handful of the gang are left to survive—insecure Rogen, grumpy Baruchel, pretentious Franco, as well as Jonah Hill (from everything from SUPERBAD to MONEYBALL, 2011) in full diva mode and Craig Robinson (who you might recognize from HOT TUB TIME MACHINE, 2010 and the TV series THE OFFICE.). And, once they all try to get some sleep, out of the bathroom comes the shambling form of Danny McBride, who crashed the party the night before and was passed out in the tub when all of the scary stuff went down.

How much you’ll like this movie has a lot to do with how much you like these actors. I for one have been a fan of some of these guys since the FREAKS AND GEEKS days, when they were just kids. I like all these guys, and it’s just funny to see them interact in light of the horrific situation they’re in.

For me, though, the biggest plus here is Danny McBride, who I just think is one of the best comic actors around today. From his debut in the indie comedy THE FOOT FIST WAY (2006) to his hilarious HBO series EASTBOUND AND DOWN, I am a total fan. Although my enthusiasm for the guy doesn’t mean I’m delusional enough to have thought 2011’s YOUR HIGHNESS (starring Franco and McBride) was a good movie. His completely obnoxious persona completes works in this one, though.

Not everything works in THIS IS THE END. Once we have our six men trapped in Franco’s house, trying to figure out what is going on, there are moments when it almost seems like they’re not sure what to do next, and there are a few parts that go on too long. It’s the downside of a movie that feels improvised; sometimes the improvisation can seem to run out of steam. There are parts where they seem like they’re making it up as they go along.

There are some special effects, mostly involving CGI monsters, which aren’t too bad. But most of the movie is just a bunch of friends hanging out and talking, and on that level it works. I thought it was a lot funnier than a majority of comedies I’ve seen lately. It’s got its flaws, but it’s also a lot of fun. It seems to go on a little long, but if you judge a comedy by the amount of laughs it gives you, then you’ll probably feel like you got your money’s worth as you leave the theater.

I thought the trailers for this one looked pretty hilarious, and the movie does have its share of big laughs. I know I was laughing a lot during its running time, but I was a little disappointed that it did not live up to my expectations all the way through. I will say that, whenever Danny McBride is onscreen (or Michael Cera earlier in the film), the laughs increase. Another big plus is the segment where Jonah Hill gets possessed by a demon, and the other guys try to perform an exorcism on him. Oh, and a scene where we find out what happened to James Franco’s neighbor, Channing Tatum, is pretty hilarious as well.

The scenes with Danny McBride are some of my favorites in THIS IS THE END.

It has its flaws, but there’s a lot to like about THIS IS THE END. I like these guys a lot, and it’s kind of like hanging out at their house for a couple of hours. It seems like that would be fun, even if the world was ending outside.

I give it three out of five knives.

LL Soares gives THIS IS THE END ~three knives.

THE LAST EXORCISM PART II (2013)

Posted in 2013, Demonic Possession, Devil Movies, Exorcism Movies, Indie Horror, LL Soares Reviews, Occult, Sequels with tags Ashley Bell, demons, Ed Gass-Donnelly, Horror Movie, Last Exorcism 2, LOuis Herthum, possession, Quiet Horror, sequel on March 4, 2013 by knifefighter

THE LAST EXORCISM PART II
Movie Review by L.L. Soares

Before sitting down to review this one, I went back and read my Cinema Knife Fight review (with Nick Cato) of the first LAST EXORCISM movie from 2010, and it refreshed a lot of the back story for me. Back then, I gave the first movie three knives, and it was based mostly on the performance of Patrick Fabian as Reverend Cotton Marcus. The movie started out like a documentary of Marcus and his vocation as a preacher and exorcist. The way Fabian played him was likeable and charismatic, and I really enjoyed the movie until the final scene. The funny thing is, looking back at it now, I really don’t mind the ending at all, and it’s grown on me.

Which brings us to this new movie, THE LAST EXORCISM PART II. Based on the trailer, I thought this was just another cynical attempt to cash in on a movie that did pretty well at the box office (and cost a small amount to make) by producing a quickie sequel. But I have to admit, it wasn’t what I thought it was going to be.

In the second film, Cotton Marcus is nowhere to be seen, since he pretty much met his doom at the end of the first movie. This time around, the focus is on Nell Sweetzer (Ashley Bell), who was also a standout in the first film. She was the girl Marcus went to exorcize, and she was convincing as a poor, lost innocent undergoing a terrifying ordeal at the “hands” of a demon.

Things begin not long after the events of the first film. As PART II opens, a couple find Nell (again played by Bell) in their house late at night (she gets into bed with the husband and even scratches him, when the wife gets up to go to the bathroom). The scene where they track her down to the kitchen, huddled up on a counter and looking deranged, is actually quite effective. She ends up in a mental hospital, and it’s explained that her family died during the night that ended the first film, when her father’s house caught on fire. She is scared, confused and clearly traumatized by what she has gone through. We also see that everyone is treating her as the victim of a cult, which makes sense, but it doesn’t address the fact that she was truly possessed by a demon in the first film. Something the medical community would avoid.

Not long after being admitted to the hospital, Nell is determined to be pretty harmless to herself and to others, and is released to a halfway house in New Orleans. The place is overseen by Frank Merle (Muse Watson), and Nell makes some new friends, including her roommate Gwen (Julia Garner), who at times seems to have a cruel streak, along with Daphne (Erica Michelle) and Mo (Sharice Angelle Williams). Nell gets a job as a maid at a motel, and even finds herself attracted to a boy who works at the motel, named Chris (Spencer Treat Clark). She’s a little strange, but the others seem to accept her, and Nell starts to slowly adapt to a fairly normal life, which is amazing, considering the events of the first film.

But, as we know going into the theater, a normal life is not really in the cards for Nell. The demon that possessed her in the first film, Abalom, soon makes its presence known, and makes it clear it wants her back. The weirdness happens slowly, with the odd passerby on the street saying something cryptic to her. A street performer (who pretends to be a statue in the park) following her during some festivities. When she goes into a church for refuge, even there a preacher seems to have a link to Abalom and tells her it is useless to resist, as strange figures appear in the church’s windows. Nell flees in a panic.

There are also times when her father, Louis (Louis Herthum, who also played the role in the first film) appears to speak to her. Once, late at night, she sees him sitting in the chair across from her bed, and he tells her he is trying to protect her. Is he real or just a figment of her tortured imagination? Other strange things happen when she’s asleep, like the fact that one of her hands often caresses her when she’s unconscious, as if it no longer belongs to her, and she levitates and twists into painful-looking shapes, without ever being aware of it.

One particularly uncomfortable moment involves the other girls finding a video on Youtube of her being exorcized by Reverend Marcus in the first film. She is twisting violently into unnatural shapes, and speaking in voices, and the other girls are both fascinated and scared by what they see. Nell comes into the room, and when she finds out what they’re watching, she screams at them to shut it off.

Some of the people around her aren’t what they seem to be, but not all of them are in league with the devil. A woman named Cecile (Tarra Riggs) has made it her mission to save Nell from the forces that want her, and she sets up a meeting with some like-minded friends. Can they save her from the forces of darkness? Well, you’ll have to see THE LAST EXORCISM PART II to find out.

Right off the bat, I want to make it clear that not everyone is going to like this movie. First off, there are long stretches where nothing seems to happen. It’s almost more of a character study than a horror movie, as we watch Nell slowly adapt to her new life and become a part of normal society, something she was never allowed to do when she lived on her father’s farm. We want her to find happiness with her new friends and with Chris. But we know it’s only a matter of time before the satanic being that once shared her skin comes back. The movie is not fast-paced. It takes its time, and there are long gaps between scares. And anyone looking for a roller coaster ride isn’t going to find it here.

Strangely, I didn’t mind the pacing or the lack of scares at all. Nell is so interesting that I really wanted to see more of her life. I found her struggle for normalcy to be touching, and believable. And even if it comes off more as a drama at times, I didn’t see that as a bad thing. Ashley Bell gives a terrific performance here as a girl who has endured great horrors and struggles to transcend them. It’s really a showcase for her as an actress (just like the first LAST EXORCISM film was a showcase for actor Patrick Fabian) and in that sense, I enjoyed it. I also thought her looks worked very well in defining her character. She has an odd face that sometimes looks almost like an old woman’s and other times seems rather pretty. This odd quality gives physical presence to the confusion and turmoil going on inside her. I was really impressed with Bell, and thought she did a great job as the lead in this film. In fact, watching PART II, I actually found myself wanting to spend more time with this character, and I would actually look forward to a PART III if the same filmmakers were involved.

One thing I didn’t like was that, in trying to present things almost as a drama, the filmmakers felt the need to pop in some “false scares” to keep the audience awake. Stuff like dogs suddenly barking loudly in the dark, or images in Nell’s mind (visions or dreams) suddenly popping up on screen and screaming. I thought these things were unnecessary, but I’m sure that the people involved thought it was a legitimate choice, since the movie is pretty quiet for the most part, and it was their way of reminding us this is a horror movie, even if it is an unusual one. And not all audience members would be as patient without a few jolts added here and there. For the most part, LAST EXORCISM PART II is actually a good example of “quiet horror,” which means it’s not really inhibited by its normally dreadful PG-13 rating.

Also, the ending this time around was a little predictable, and almost had a CARRIE feel to it, but it still worked for me. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I see similarities between Nell’s story and Carrie White’s.

I also thought it was interesting that PART II is filmed in a much different way than the first one. The first film was presented as a fake documentary, focused mostly on Reverend Marcus, and it worked very well in that way. You would think PART II would adopt the same gimmick, but it doesn’t. I thought it would hurt this movie to be filmed in a more traditional, straightforward way, but it actually works pretty well here. To film it as another “found footage” film would defy logic (who would be filming this fragile girl struggling to stay sane?) and the gimmick would get in the way of the storytelling in this one. So it was a good decision to leave the gimmicks behind in PART II.

By the end of the film, it is quite clear that this is a horror movie. But leading up to there, it could almost be the story of a girl dealing with mental illness, trying to get better after painful events. As I watched it, it made me think of how very different the original THE EXORCIST (1973) is from its first sequel, the quieter and more thoughtful EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC (1977). Both THE HERETIC and LAST EXORCISM PART II took risks by not being rehashes of the films that came before them, and I find that much more refreshing than seeing the same thing all over again.

Aside from Bell and Herthum, this new movie has a completely different team involved. Daniel Stamm, who directed the first film, has now been now replaced by Ed Gass-Donnelly, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Damien Chazelle. Gass-Donnelly’s previous work consists of several short films and two other features, THIS BEAUTIFUL CITY (2007) and SMALL TOWN MURDER SONGS (2010), which also sound like small, quirky films, and I might just seek them out.

Eli Roth is one of the producers of this film (he also produced the first one), and I still think his name is associated with product that is a little more interesting than the standard fare.

Most fans of horror films probably won’t like this film, and will wonder what I see in it. But the truth is, the fact that this movie is so different from the first one, and takes risks that would alienate some theater-goers, endears itself to me all the more. I’m a fan of movies that take chances and confound expectations. And in that sense, THE LAST EXORICSM PART II is a success. I give it three knives.

LL Soares gives THE LAST EXORCISM PART II ~three knives.

2 Comments »

Cinema Knife Fight COMING ATTRACTIONS for March 2013

Posted in 2013, Action Movies, Adult Fairy Tales, Body Horror, Coming Attractions, Crime Films, Demons, Exorcism Movies, Fantasy, GIANTS!, Occult with tags Cell Count, Coming Attractions, G.I. Joe, Giant Slayer, Last Exorcism 2, Oz on March 1, 2013 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT – COMING ATTRACTIONS:
MARCH 2013
by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(The Scene: The magical land of Oz, outside the Emerald City to be exact. Munchkins are dancing and singing, good witches are flying about singing cheerful songs, and MICHAEL ARRUDA & L.L. SOARES stroll down the yellow brick road.)

L.L SOARES: Being here brings back so many memories.

MICHAEL ARRUDA: Like the day you met your cousins, the flying monkeys?

LS: That was a special day. Teaching them how to be scary, and how to beat tin men over the head with clubs. Ah, memories! But I was actually talking about watching THE WIZARD OF OZ as a kid. Back in the days before videotape, it only played once on TV every year, and was a really big deal.

MA: I’ve never liked THE WIZARD OF OZ.

LS: What? Was it too scary for you?

MA: I used to find it depressing. I enjoyed Hammer Films much better.

GOOD WITCH: Welcome, Cinema Knife Fighters! Are you here to review OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL?

LS: Not yet. We’re here today for our MARCH COMING ATTRACTIONS column.

MA: That column where we announce which movies we’ll be reviewing in the coming month, and we’re here in Oz, because OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL is probably the month’s biggest movie.

LS: But it doesn’t open until March 8, and so we have some other films to discuss first.

GOOD WITCH: Carry on.

MA: First up in March, we’ll be bringing you reviews of two movies. I’ll be reviewing JACK THE GIANT SLAYER (2013), and L.L. will be reviewing THE LAST EXORCISM PART 2 (2013). Both these films open on March 1.

While no fan of the recent rage of fantasy fairy tale movies aimed at adults, films like HANSEL & GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS (2013) and SNOW WHITE AND THE HUNTSMAN (2012), based on the trailers, I don’t think JACK THE GIANT SLAYER looks half bad.

LS: I think you’ve been eating too many magic beans!

MA: It looks like it might be taken seriously enough to be a successful movie. I know the CGI effects in the previews look pretty good, and the giants look formidable. Sure, it’ll probably be stupid, but I’m hoping it might have an edge to it, something along the lines of the movies Terry Gilliam used to make.

LS: You said the CGI effects look good and the giants look formidable? I’m not sure we saw the same trailer. The giants I saw looked pretty damn hokey. Incredibly fake-looking giants don’t tempt me to see this movie much.

MA: Nicholas Hoult is playing Jack, and we just saw Hoult in WARM BODIES (2013). As much as I didn’t really like that movie, Hoult wasn’t bad in it, so hopefully he’ll be decent as Jack.

LS: Another reason I’m glad I’m not seeing it.

MA: The cast also includes Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, and Ian McShane, so there’s some pretty good talent involved here.

It’s directed by Bryan Singer, who directed X-MEN (2000) and X2 (2003) and SUPERMAN RETURNS (2006), a film you liked more than I did, but again, there’s talent involved in this movie, so it just might be good.

LS: I like Singer, but nothing about the trailers for this one makes me want to see it. Then again, the trailer for THE LAST EXORCISM PART 2 looks like it could be awful, too. This movie really didn’t need a sequel, but the reason why the first movie was so good was because the lead guy, the exorcist Cotton Marcus (Patrick Fabian), made the story compelling. It looks like he’s not even in this second movie. So I don’t have high hopes for it. It just looks like the usual exorcism shenanigans.

I doubt either one of us will see something great, but at least we’ll get two solo reviews out of it.

MA: Yeah, THE LAST EXORCISM PART 2 looks like one of those movies that has no business being made. Now, I liked the first movie a lot, but, like you said, the main reason for liking that one was the main character, the preacher Cotton Marcus, but this second movie isn’t about him, it’s about the young girl from the first movie, Nell (Ashley Bell) and her story just isn’t as interesting.

Plus the trailer for this one makes it look really silly.

LS: On March 8 it’s the big release of the month, OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL.

MA: I have to admit, this one looks really good, but I can’t say I’m overly excited about it, since I’ve never been a fan of THE WIZARD OF OZ. But it is Sam Raimi at the helm, and I do liked James Franco a lot, and Mila Kunis is nice to look at, so I probably will end up liking this one.

LS: I don’t think I’ve ever met anyone who didn’t like THE WIZARD OF OZ before. You’re an odd gent.

MA: Really? I know a lot of people who aren’t fans of THE WIZARD OF OZ. I can’t speak for them, but for me, when it was on TV each year when I was a kid, I used to watch it and like it, but eventually found myself sick of the story, especially the final scene where Dorothy’s relatives chuckle at her story about Oz, obviously dismissing her tale as a figment of her imagination.

LS: What did you want them to do? Believe her? Tell me, is it possible this scene bothered you because when you were a child, people didn’t believe your stories?

MA: Vampires are real and living in my basement! (suddenly composing himself). Sorry. No, I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Anyway, on March 15 we’ll be reviewing the new thriller THE CALL (2013), starring Halle Berry as a 911 operator who becomes entangled with a serial killer. Now, if you’ve seen the trailer for this one, you’ve probably seen the entire movie. It’s pretty extensive, and I feel like I’ve seen the film already, so I’m really not that excited about it.

It also stars Abigail Breslin, Little Miss Sunshine herself.

LS: Oh boy! Maybe she’ll sing! But seriously, I am not looking forward to this one at all. It looks pretty awful, and you’re right, the trailer makes you feel like you already saw the movie. So why bother?

LS: On March 22, we’ll be bringing you a DVD review of CELL COUNT. This one is part of our up-and-coming filmmaker series, where we review new movies by directors who are trying to make a name for themselves. I hope it’s good.

MA: I don’t know much about CELL COUNT, but I’m looking forward to seeing it.

We finish the month with two reviews on the same weekend yet again. I’ll be reviewing G.I. JOE: RETALIATION (2013), and L.L. will be reviewing THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES (2012). Something tells me you’re getting the better end of this deal!

G.I. JOE: RETALIATION I’m sure will be absolutely stupid. G.I. JOE: THE RISE OF THE COBRA, which I saw in 2009, was not only one of the worst movies I saw that year, but one of the worst movies I’ve seen period! Ever!

Yet, somehow, this one’s got a decent cast— actually more than decent— with the likes of Bruce Willis, Dwayne Johnson, Channing Tatum, Ray Stevenson, RZA, Arnold Vosloo, Byung-hun Lee from I SAW THE DEVIL (2010), and Jonathan Pryce. So, who knows? It might be good after all!

Plus, the screenplay was written by Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick, the same guys who wrote ZOMBIELAND (2009).

LS: Yeah, I can’t stand G.I. JOE movies, so I’m glad I’ll be missing this one.

MA: I just don’t get why we even have G.I. JOE movies. When I hear “G.I. Joe” I think of the popular toy action figure from years back, but is it even still around today? I’m sure it is, but is it popular? I don’t get it.

LS: THE PLACE BEYOND THE PINES is a mystery starring Ryan Gosling, and it involves some kind of heist, based on the trailer. I’m eager to see this one.

MA: Yeah, it features Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper, two of my favorite actors, so I’d say this one sounds like a winner.

And that wraps things up for our MARCH COMING ATTRACTIONS column. We’ll see you next week with reviews of JACK THE GIANT SLAYER and THE LAST EXORCISM PART 2.

GOOD WITCH: Remember to give OZ THE GREAT AND POWERFUL a positive review.

MA: That depends on whether we like it or not, because if we don’t like it, then we can’t in good faith—.

(GOOD WITCH zaps MA with her wand and turns him into a frog.)

LS: Wow. You’ll have to show me how to do that! But what’s the idea of turning Michael into a frog? I thought you were a good witch?

GOOD WITCH: I am. When it comes to casting magical spells, I’m good!

LS: I’d ask you to change him back, but that would be so unlike me. Okay, folks, we’ll see you next weekend! Don’t worry. Michael will be back to his normal self in time to review JACK THE GIANT SLAYER. I know this for a fact, because there’s no way I’m going to see it!

FROG: Rib-bit! Rib-bit!

—END—

A HAUNTED HOUSE (2012)

Posted in 2013, Comedies, Evil Spirits, Exorcism Movies, Faux Documentaries, Fun Stuff!, Ghosts!, Haunted Houses, LL Soares Reviews, Parodies, Possessed By Demons, R-Rated Comedy, Spoofs with tags A Haunted House, Affion Crockette, Cedric the Entertainer, Essence Atkins, ghosts, J.B. Smoove, Marlon Wayans, Spoof on January 14, 2013 by knifefighter

A HAUNTED HOUSE (2013)
Movie Review by L.L. Soares

While Michael was seeing GANGSTER SQUAD, I opted to check out this comedy starring Marlon Wayans instead, and I’m glad I did. A HAUNTED HOUSE, despite the lame, generic title, is actually a pretty good comedy, taking aim at all of the “found footage” horror films we’ve been subjected to lately, from the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY films, to THE LAST EXORCISM (2010) and last year’s THE DEVIL INSIDE.

The found footage genre is so prevalent in the movies these days, that it was only a matter of time before someone skewered them. So along comes actor/writer Marlon Wayans (who’s been in everything from the TV show IN LIVING COLOR, 1992 – 2001, to the first two SCARY MOVIEs and WHITE CHICKS, 2004), to do the skewering.

Marlon stars as Malcolm, a likeable guy who tells us early on that this is a big day, because his girlfriend, Kisha (Essence Atkins), is finally moving into his house. Like the people in those PARANORMAL ACTIVITY movies, Malcolm is obsessed with filming everything that goes on in his house. Things start off on a bad foot when Kisha runs over his poor little dog pulling into the driveway, and they just get worse from there. When Kisha is upset that her keys are on the floor (How did they get there?!!), she immediately deduces that the house must be haunted and calls in a psychic named Chip (Nick Swardson), who seems a little too interested in Malcolm. When things get weirder, Malcolm calls in a security guy named Dan (David Koechner) to install cameras all over the inside and outside of his house, so that he can keep track of the “ghost.” An especially funny scene involves Malcolm’s cousin Ray-Ray (Affion Crockett) and his crew, a group of thugs who are determined to get to the bottom of the haunting, but find out it’s not that easy to intimidate a supernatural being.

When Malcolm and Kisha determine that it’s not a ghost at all, but a malicious demon (!), there’s a funny flashback to Kisha’s childhood with her callous Mom (Robin Thede) and Dad (the always hilarious J.B. Smoove), that delves into the origins of Kisha’s demon problem. Malcolm and Kisha do everything they can to get rid of their unwanted visitor, including getting stoned with the invisible creep (they all get mellow and engage ins some supernatural hijinks), and even having sex with the demon (while Kisha has a good time with this, Malcolm’s experience isn’t quite so pleasant).

Malcolm (Marlon Wayans) and Kisha (Essence Atkins) find themselves in A HAUNTED HOUSE.

When Kisha finally gets possessed by the demon (and we get into EXORCISM territory), Malcolm finally has to call in the big guns, which include psychic Chip, Dan and his cameraman sidekick, Bob (Dave Sheridan), who have their own paranormal TV show (on the Internet and cable access) and the local priest (and ex-con), Father Williams (Cedric the Entertainer, who’s really good here). They chase the possessed Kisha all over the house, with funny results.

Directed by Michael Tiddes, and written by Marlon Wayans and Rick Alvarez, A HAUNTED HOUSE could easily be part of the SCARY MOVIE franchise, but those movies have been taken over by the Zucker Brothers (the guys behind the AIRPLANE and NAKED GUN movies). That said, A HAUNTED HOUSE seemed to be funnier than the usual SCARY MOVIE installment, with a higher ratio of laughs.

Marlon Wayans does a fine job as our “hero,” Malcolm. Essence Atkins is really funny as Kisha, and the entire cast is pretty solid. Other supporting players include Andrew Daly (who you might recognize from the HBO series EASTBOUND AND DOWN) and Alanna Ubach, as Steve and Jenny, a swinger couple who are friends with Malcolm and Kisha, and who are always trying to get them to swap partners (Malcolm is completely clueless to their intentions), and Marlene Forte as Malcolm’s maid, Rosa, who is up to some very surprising shenanigans when the couple is away.

If a comedy is judged by how much you laugh, then A HAUNTED HOUSE is a success. I laughed a lot, and so did the packed audience I saw it with. The gags in this one come fast and furious, and most of them work. It doesn’t hurt that the movies this one is spoofing have created their own list of clichés just waiting to be goofed on.

I give A HAUNTED HOUSE, three knives. But man, do I wish they had come up with a better title.

LL Soares gives A HAUNTED HOUSE ~three knives.

1 Comment »

THE WORST MOVIES OF 2012 by L.L. Soares

Posted in 2012, 2013, 3-D, Bad Acting, Bad Situations, Based on a Video Game, Exorcism Movies, Fantasy, Faux Documentaries, Just Plain Bad, LL Soares Reviews, Sequels, Worst-Of lists with tags 3D, Resident Evil, Silent, Underworld, Worst Movies of 2012 on January 2, 2013 by knifefighter

THE WORST FILMS OF 2012
By L.L. Soares

Well, there were lots of really good movies in 2012, but, as usual, there were some dogs as well. I think the fact that it was a lot easier writing this list – and keeping it to 10- is a good sign. There were a lot more good movies than bad ones in 2012.

These are the worst movies I saw last year.

NUMBER ONE:
SILENT HOUSE

I keep hearing the original 2010 film from Uruguay was better. That’s not hard to believe. The American remake of SILENT HOUSE was one of the worst movies I’ve had to sit through in a long time. Poor Elizabeth Olson, who was so great in MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE (2011) is completely wasted in this “thriller” about a woman terrorized in her summer home by an unseen intruder (well, unseen until the end). The big gimmick here is that it was supposedly filmed in real time, all in one take. If that’s so, then it was a lot of effort for nothing. It has a stupid twist ending, involving something that should have been traumatic, but is never made believable by the awful script. It was an idea that could have been done well, but the filmmakers involved completely blew it. Laughably bad.

NUMBER TWO:
RESIDENT EVIL: RETRIBUTION (IN 3D)

The previous Resident Evil movie (RESIDENT EVIL: AFTERLIFE, 2010) was at least dumb fun. I was starting to think this was one of the better film series based on a video game – at least the movies were entertaining. Then the new one (RETRIBUTION) comes out in 2012, and it’s just friggin dismal. It’s more of a place holder between the previous movie and the next one than a real movie of its own, with very little plot to distinguish it, and no attempt to tie up loose ends. I walked out of the theater feeling really cheated. If nothing else, this movie convinced me that it’s time to stop making RESIDENT EVIL movies.

NUMBER THREE:
DARK SHADOWS

As a kid, I used to watch the original DARK SHADOWS TV show after school every day in the late 60s/early 70s. It was extremely low-budget, and sometimes laughably bad, but they always played it straight and tried to make it a decent show. Basically a soap opera with vampires and werewolves, the main plot involved the vampire Barnabas Collins and his struggle to reunite with the reincarnated version of his lost love, Josette. It spawned two pretty good movies at the time, too (HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS in 1970 and NIGHT OF DARK SHADOWS in 1971), which were clearly horror films. Then Tim Burton decided to revive the old show as a new movie. Is it a bigger budget version of the old horror show? Nope. It’s a completely asinine comedy, involving Johnny Depp as Barnabas (the role was originally played by Jonathan Frid), rising from the dead in the 1970s and experiencing culture shock when confronted with hippies and bad fashion. Made with that “wink wink” style of comedy that I can’t stand, this is easily one of the most annoying films of 2012. What a wasted opportunity to make a movie version that was truly scary. Instead, we get a moronic exercise in tedium.

NUMBER FOUR:
THE TWILIGHT SAGA: BREAKING DAWN PART 2

You know something’s wrong when the latest TWILIGHT movie isn’t the worst movie of the year. The end of the “saga” – BREAKING DAWN – was broken into two films so the greedy studios could make more money. Meanwhile, we get more of the same crap we’ve been getting since the first film. Bella (Kristen Stewart) is now a vampire and is still in love with Edward (Robert Pattinson). The bad guys are told a lie and instead of checking it out, just attack our heroes and their family, when everything could have been resolved in a few minutes. I want to say this movie was a relief, because I knew the series was finally over, but I bet you they find a way to keep it going. Just to keep the money coming in. I want the two hours of my life I wasted on this movie back.

NUMBER FIVE:
SILENT HILL – REVELATION 3D

Not a good year for movies with “Silent” in their titles, I guess. And almost all of the 3D movies in 2012 were pretty lame, so this one has two strikes against it from the get go.

The original SILENT HILL movie from 2006 wasn’t great, but at least it had some interesting imagery and some strange scenes to keep it from being a complete snooze. About a journey to a surreal town/world where it’s always raining ashes and demons fight each other for power, it was actually one of the better video game-based movies. But as we learned with the RESIDENT EVIL franchise, these guys should stop while their ahead. It took six years to make this sequel, and they shouldn’t have bothered. It’s boring, incoherent, and just plain bad. Poor Pyramid Head, the strange-looking beastie from the series who deserved a better movie to appear in. Maybe it’s time to finally have a moratorium on movies based on video games.

NUMBER SIX:
UNDERWORLD AWAKENING (IN 3D)

The UNDERWORLD films aren’t based on a video game, but they might as well be. Kate Beckinsdale returns as an ass-kicking vampire who has to fight werewolves and humans in what has to be one of the most boring franchises around. I hate this series. I hate it even more because Beckinsdale is hot in that leather outfit and deserves to be in a horror movie franchise that doesn’t suck. The vampires here might not sparkle like in the TWILIGHT movies, but they’re not much better. Another boring series that needs to just stop already.

NUMBER SEVEN:
THE DEVIL INSIDE

Another “found footage” horror movie – a genre I normally enjoy. And the first half of this exorcism movie is actually pretty good, until it falls apart. A woman is making a documentary about her mother, who has committed murder while being possessed by a demon. There are a few good scenes, but they’re not enough to save the movie. Overall, it’s just too predictable and doesn’t give us anything we haven’t seen before. And then there’s the fact that the movie doesn’t really have an ending. Instead, it ends abruptly and we’re given a URL and told to go to the website for more. I’m sorry, I don’t pay for a movie ticket to be told to check out a website. Another movie where I left the theater more than a little pissed off. You would be much better off renting the 2010 movie THE LAST EXORCISM instead. It’s another “found footage” horror flick about an exorcism, but it’s actually really good and doesn’t waste your time.

NUMBER EIGHT:
THE INBETWEENERS

The British series this movie was based on, about four socially inept teenagers who are desperate to finally lose their virginity, is supposed to be pretty funny. Or so I’m told. But, if that’s the case, I have no idea why the movie version is so unfunny. The characters are likable enough. There’s some heartfelt scenes where you actually care about the people involved. But there are hardly any laughs. This is supposed to be a comedy. A comedy without laughs isn’t much of a success. And the fact that this was a big hit in England is kind of depressing.

NUMBER NINE:
BATTLESHIP

The idea of making a board game into a movie is kind of dumb. The people involved with this movie were given an almost impossible task – to take this concept and run with it – and they try. But it’s a failure. Another waste of film and actors and special effects – all for nothing. Poor Taylor Kitsch. After playing the lead in a really good movie (JOHN CARTER) that was unfairly maligned, he next starred in this cinematic garbage, and any buzz he had as an up-and-coming movie star pretty much vanished. Until SAVAGES, that is. But will SAVAGES be enough to keep his career from fizzling out? 2012 must have been a real rollercoaster for poor Mr. Kitsch. As for BATTLESHIP, I hope the poor box office for this one has sunk any chances of a sequel. But no matter how awful this movie was, it was still better than the eight movies I listed before it.

NUMBER TEN:
WRATH OF THE TITANS

Despite their budgets and the high-tech special effects, the TITANS movies have left me cold. First there was CLASH OF THE TITANS (2010) that was a remake of a 1981 Ray Harryhausen fantasy film with stop-motion monsters. In the new films, the monsters are CGI, but I don’t see them as much of an improvement. They’re kind of generic in a way. Sam Worthington plays Perseus as kind of a one-note character (and I know he’s capable of more than that – maybe he’s as bored as I am). Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes are completely wasted as Zeus and Hades, respectively (but they’re the only characters in the movie with any real passion). Some of the monsters look cool, but overall, the movie is kind of boring. The story just isn’t that compelling….ZZZZZ… Oops, did I nod off there for a moment?

HONORABLE MENTION

PROJECT X – A faux documentary-style teen sex comedy about the craziest house party ever. It didn’t make my list because it was so forgettable that I…er…forgot about it until I saw it on Michael’s list. It mustn’t have annoyed me as much as it did him, but, frankly, it’s not worth talking about any further.

V/H/S (2012)

Posted in 2012, Anthology Films, Demons, Evil Kids!, Exorcism Movies, Ghosts!, Haunted Houses, Horror, Indie Horror, Killers, LL Soares Reviews, Paranormal, Secrets, Thrillers, Twist Endings, VIOLENCE! with tags Adam Wingard, David Bruckner, demons, exorcism, Glenn McQuaid, haunted house, Joe Swanberg, Radio Silence, ti west, VHS on September 25, 2012 by knifefighter

V/H/S (2012)
Movie Review by L.L. Soares

V/H/S is a new anthology horror movie made up of five shorts and a wraparound story. There seem to be a lot of these kinds of movies around lately. The other ones that come to mind are CHILLERAMA (2011) and THE THEATRE BIZARRE (also 2011). Both were mixed bags. But the good thing about anthology movies is that if you don’t like one of the stories, there are more to come, if you just wait. Overall, I tend to enjoy these kinds of movies a lot.

V/H/S is above-average in this regard. For the most part, all of the stories are pretty good. Sure, some are better than others, but I didn’t feel there were any clunkers this time around.

The film starts off with the wraparound story, called “Tape 56.” This ongoing segment is directed by Adam Wingard, who also made POP SKULL (2007), A HORRIBLE WAY TO DIE (2010) and YOU’RE NEXT (2011). Just a word of warning, if you start watching the movie, you might not care a lot for this one. But give it a chance. It just sets up the premise. But the characters involved are kind of despicable.

We are introduced to a bunch of guys led by Gary (Calvin Reeder) who are going around doing awful things and filming it for money. One of the things they do is follow couples and then attack them. The boyfriend is pulled aside and restrained, while the girlfriend is grabbed and her breasts are exposed for the camera. Gary says he gets $50 for each one of these he tapes, and he says he’s done about 25 of them so far. Needless to say, the characters who are supposed to be our point of view for this story start out being unlikable, which may put you off from the get-go.

The set-up is this: these guys are hired to go a house in the middle of the night and get a videotape. It has something to do with blackmail, and the guys say they plan to make copies of the tape, so they can make more money. What exactly is on the tape, we’ll never know. They don’t say (although one character does elude that it might be “a senator having sex on film”), but the job does pay big money—much more than they’re used to. So of course they jump at the chance.

They go to the designated house at the middle of the night, and we’re told there may be someone there, but it’s an old man and he won’t be any trouble. The guys get in, and search the place. They find two things. First of all, they find the old man, and he appears to be dead in a chair, in front of a wall full of television screens. There’s a VCR and a tape in it.

The second thing is that there are lots of videotapes in the house, and the guys aren’t really sure which one they’re supposed to retrieve. So they start looking through them, playing them one after another. And that is the theme of the movie.

The first short film we see is called “Amateur Night.” It is directed by David Bruckner, who also made THE SIGNAL (2007). And right off the bat, it might be my favorite of the bunch. It features more creeps. This time it’s three guys who plan to go to a bar, pick up some girls, and film themselves having sex with them. They’re Shane (Mike Donlan) Patrick (Joe Sykes) and Clint (Drew Sawyer). Clearly there’s a market for this kind of thing. Clint, a nerdy looking guy, wears a pair of glasses that have a camera and microphone built-in. They go to a bar and get sloshed, and find one girl who is willing to go back with them, named Lisa (Jas Sams). At the same time, a spooky girl with big eyes named Lily (Hannah Fierman) is sitting by herself, and Clint starts filming her. She gravitates toward him and keeps saying “I like you.” When they all go back to the hotel room (Lisa and Lily go back with the guys), things get decidedly weird. I have to admit, I wasn’t really surprised by what happened—I kind of saw it coming—but it was so well done, that I didn’t care. I really enjoyed this one. Featuring a great performance by Fierman.

A scary moment from V/H/S.

The second movie is “Second Honeymoon” by Ti West, who gave us HOUSE OF THE DEVIL (2009) and THE INNKEEPERS (2011). It’s about a couple on a road trip—Stephanie (Sophia Takal) and Sam (Joe Swanberg), who are filming it as they go—who stop at a motel. Sometime during the night, someone is in the room with them, watching them sleep, and it goes from there. Not the best of the stories, but a solid little piece from West, who I have to admit, I’m not a big fan of. I actually think he’s feature films are overrated. This one was kind of predictable, but decent, and I liked it better than his feature films that I’ve seen.

“Tuesday the 17^th “ by Glenn McQuaid (who also directed 2008’s I SELL THE DEAD) is another one that seems by-the-numbers… at first. Four kids go out to the woods to spend some time in a secluded cabin. But once they get there, things go a little differently than expected. Once again, not something that will blow you away, but a solid little film.

The third one, “The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She was Younger,” (great title, by the way!), was directed by “mumblecore” indie director Joe Swanberg (who also acted in Ti West’s installment), and it’s another of my favorites. It features two people talking on Skype. One is a girl named Emily (Helen Rogers) who lives in a haunted apartment. The other is her boyfriend, calling from medical school, where he’s studying. Whenever something weird happens, she calls him so he can be a witness, and at one point we see some ghosts. This is another one, however, where things go much differently than we expect. I liked the weird twist ending a lot.

Finally, we have “10/31/98”, by four guys who go by the name Radio Silence (they are directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Tyler Gillett, Justin Martinez and Chad Villella), three of the guys previously made a series of “interactive adventures” under the name Chad, Matt and Rob. This one is a really good one, too. Four guys jump in a car and go to a house for a Halloween party. They have a friend who always rents a house each Halloween and throws a lavish haunted house party. One guy is dressed as a nanny cam (a teddy bear with a camera), so he’s filming this one. They get there, to find the house empty. When they go exploring, they go up to the attic where they find a weird ceremony going on. They think it’s part of the fun, but it’s not. It’s a real exorcism. And things get scary from there.

The wraparound story pops in between the movies and at the end, as the guys in the house search for more tapes, the dead guy in the chair leaves at various points (we see this, but the guys don’t notice) and there’s a big, scary ending.

Another scary moment from V/H/S.

All in all, a great flick, and while there were three that really blew me away, the other two are pretty good, too. So no bad ones. I actually think V/H/S is pretty satisfying and the best of the new anthology horror films I’ve seen lately. It is currently on cable OnDemand in some areas and will get a limited theatrical release in early October.

This one is definitely worth checking out. I give it four knives.

LL Soares gives V/H/S ~ four knives.

1 Comment »

Suburban Grindhouse Memories: SUPERSTITION (1985)

Posted in 1980s Horror, 2012, Exorcism Movies, Gore!, Grindhouse, Nick Cato Reviews, Slasher Movies, Suburban Grindhouse Memories, Supernatural, Witches with tags exorcism, gore, Grindhouse, slasher, Superstition, Witch on May 3, 2012 by knifefighter

SUBURBAN GRINDHOUSE MEMORIES
Horror Hotel This Isn’t…
By Nick CatoOn a freezing cold Saturday night in January of 1985, I was still reeling from seeing my second Metallica gig at Brooklyn’s famous rock club, L’Amour (at the time no one had a clue they’d eventually become the biggest band in the world) and yet an ad I saw in my local paper a day earlier kept gnawing at my brain. SUPERSTITION came out with no TV commercials and, as far as I recall, no mentions in any of the horror magazines or fanzines at the time. And most alluring of all, it was released unrated. So I attempted to get my hearing back as I entered the (now defunct) Fox Twin Cinema, one of Staten Island’s best venues for exploitation films.

I had to laugh during the opening sequence: a couple of teenagers attempted to pull a prank on a couple who are making out near some abandoned-looking house. They both get deep sixed by an unseen killer, and I wondered why the film had a supernatural title if this was just another slasher flick.

Well, it isn’t a slasher flick per se. As we soon learn, this abandoned house—that’s actually being remodeled to house a minister and his family—had been cursed three hundred years earlier by a witch who used to live there. In flashbacks, we learn the local priest discovered this witch was in league with Satan himself (I believe it’s even said she was Satan’s daughter), and, as punishment, drowns her in a pond behind the house. Now being HORROR HOTEL (1960) is one of my all-time favorite horror films, I was already put-off by SUPERSTITION’s rip-off plot. But what redeems this Canadian production is its kill scenes: I’m guessing even though the killer here is supernatural, the producers thought it would be smart to cater to the (then) popular slasher crowd and off victims in gory and inventive ways. I still don’t think this film needed to be unrated, as there were many R-rated films released before this that were much more graphic (1980’s insanely brutal DON’T GO IN THE BASEMENT and MOTHER’S DAY—both released with an R rating—make SUPERSTITION look like a kiddie show). Go figure.

So, judging by some groans heard around the theater, it was apparent we were aware we weren’t in for a deep story. There were several things brought up during the film that are never resolved, but when a working circular saw comes unhinged from its base and flies into a young minister’s chest, spinning so fast that it goes through him, as well as the chair he’s pinned to, everyone cheered, realizing we’d at least be in for a fun splatter-fest.

While there’s plenty of violence in SUPERSTITION, much of it takes place off camera and we see the aftermath. Perhaps this is how the FX crew saved some money? Either way, many of the kills are still effective, if not disappointing to a mainly teenaged, blood-hungry-crowd.

My favorite scenes are when a cute young girl kept showing up out of nowhere, dressed in a clean white dress, giving some kind of psychobabble warnings about the house to the Reverend. It’s never explained who this girl is, and between some of the inventive kill scenes not many of us really cared. Some other fun, splattery goodness includes some poor sap being cut in half by a falling window and a head exploding via microwave (those at the beginning of the film) and another unlucky lady gets a thick spike to the ol’ noggin. Jason Vorhees himself would’ve been impressed with some of the stuff this old witch comes up with…

In one flashback sequence, there’s an exorcism performed on the witch by the accusing priest that’s quite convincing. For a change, the witch’s deep-growl possessed voice doesn’t sound too goofy, and for whatever rare reason the scene didn’t remind me of THE EXORCIST (1973), and not just because it takes place three hundred years ago.

SUPERSTITION was a decent time at the movies, if nothing ground-breaking, and all these years later I have yet to revisit it on video. I’m wondering if it holds up as a fun gore-fest? Perhaps it’ll show up on cable one of these nights and I’ll see. And if not, I’m happy enough with my one-time viewing, alongside a bunch of cheering, popcorn-throwing suburban grindhouse fanatics. For 80s gore-hounds only. All others, see HORROR HOTEL.

NOTHING good ever comes from sticking your head in a microwave…

2 Comments »

PETER DUDAR’S BEST MOVIES OF 2011

Posted in 2011, Best Of Lists, Exorcism Movies, Ghost Movies, Paranormal, Peter Dudar Reviews with tags Best of 2011, Grave Encounters, Insidious, The Devil Inside, The Poughkeepsie Tapes on January 15, 2012 by knifefighter

This really has been kind of a blah year in terms of media events. You have to figure when idiots like the Kardashians and Donald Trump garner more attention than movies, music, and books, then we as an artful society have really suffered and lost ground. It almost feels like the entertainment world really has nothing new and exciting to offer. Nonetheless, it’s imperative that we celebrate the best of the best (even if our opinions are subjective and have cause for disagreement) and since L.L. is sending me hate mail to write something, here are my picks and pans for 2011:

Best Movie: Hands down, my choice was INSIDIOUS. The fact is, though, that I just don’t have time anymore to rush out and see every movie that I want to see, and I kind of have to pick and choose. My year in the theater was peppered with must-see only flicks and kids movies like ALVIN AND THE CHIPMONKS, CHIPWRECKED! But INSIDIOUS was the one I really, really wanted to see. It lived up to the hype of the Facebook preview clips and the blurbs I’ve seen posted everywhere (and you’ve probably seen them too…the campaign where they show people getting interviewed immediately after walking out halfway, most crying or too frightened to talk about what they’d just seen). The contenders were PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 3, CAPTAIN AMERICA and the final HARRY POTTER flick. I also want to add a DVD flick that I saw at the beginning of the year (which had been released the year before) called THE NEW DAUGHTER. I thought this movie was quite sensational, and it took me a whole year to get L.L. to finally sit down and watch it. After all the protests, he finally agreed that he liked it, too.

Worst Movie: Well, not really. More like a pan on the motion picture industry in general. Over the last several years I’ve railed against remakes and reboots of my favorite horror films. This year I’m pissed off at the idiocy of presenting kick-ass trailers, only to have the movie itself NOT get released on the big screen. Cases in point: THE POUGHKEEPSIE TAPES and GRAVE ENCOUNTERS. The previews for both these movies left me drooling and checking the Moviefone app on my iPod, but were released in either limited engagements or direct-to-download releases. If you’ve made the investment on the film, why wouldn’t you try to recoup your finances? Even the worst horror films seem to make money at the box office, so what the hell is holding you back? I have seen reviews for GRAVE ENCOUNTERS, and even though they’ve been unfavorable, I still want to see it. So take note, Hollywood…don’t take us half-way and leave us like a cheap ho with the clap!

And with an eye to the future: I’m highly anticipating January’s release of THE DEVIL INSIDE. The trailers look supremely frightening; especially the NC-17 preview where the priest drowns a baby during it’s baptism (I’m still in shock from watching THAT one).

Hope you enjoyed 2011. I, for one, could have skipped it, but as my daughter is fond of saying, “You git what you git and don’t pitch a fit!”

Cheers and Blessings for 2012!

1 Comment »

THE DEVIL INSIDE (2012)

Posted in 2012, Cinema Knife Fights, Demonic Possession, Demons, Exorcism Movies, LL Soares Reviews, Nick Cato Reviews, Paranormal, Possessed By Demons with tags cinema knife fight, demons, Devil Inside, exorcism, Faux Documentary, possession, Vatican on January 9, 2012 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: THE DEVIL INSIDE
By L.L. Soares and Nick Cato

(THE SCENE: After a delayed flight, L.L. SOARES and NICK CATO arrive in Rome, Italy, where they grab a taxi to the Centrino Mental Hospital, where much of this week’s film was shot. They’re both slightly jet-lagged when they enter the lobby of the large, isolated facility).

LS: I don’t get it…you’re afraid of flying but you drag me all the way to Italy to review a movie? What the hell, man.

NC: I figured if we’re THIS CLOSE to where they filmed that great exorcism sequence, we’d be re-inspired to give this one a solid review.

LS: (Rolling his eyes). Well, at least you paid for the plane tickets, and don’t forget you promised to treat me to some REAL Italian food while we’re here. And some good wine, too.

NC: My cousin Antonio is expecting us in two hours…everything has been taken care of, buddy!

(A security guard asks them who they’re here to see. When Nick reveals they just want to use the lobby to write a film review, the burly guard chases them out. Amazingly, our American horror freaks manage to sneak into the back yard of the facility, where they squat behind a row of hedges, listening to some of the patients babble and sing strange songs).

NC: We’d better get started before that goon realizes we made it back in.

LS: Good idea. You begin this one.

NC: This week we have the latest entry into the “found footage/mock documentary” horror subgenre titled THE DEVIL INSIDE, which is basically an EXORCIST (1973) version of THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT (1999). I’m a sucker for exorcism films, and have seen almost every EXORCIST rip-off that’s come down the pike since the early 70s. While most are unwatchably bad, 2010’s THE LAST EXORCISM was a rare treat (and told things from a Protestant viewpoint, for a change), and for the most part, I’ve been enjoying this recent spout of exorcism films.

LS: Well, THE EXORCIST remains the gold standard for this kind of thing. I haven’t been too impressed with most exorcism movies since. I did like THE LAST EXORCISM, though. But, as for this “recent spout,” I can’t say every movie is worth seeing. I still think THE RITE (2011) was pretty lame.

I must admit, though, that I’m really digging the whole “found footage” style of filmmaking. I know it’s starting to become a cliché just as much as any other subgenre, but so far, I’m enjoying most of these movies, which is funny, because I didn’t care for BLAIR WITCH all that much – but I can’t deny how friggin influential that film was.

NC: So, as THE DEVIL INSIDE begins, Isabella Rossi is making a documentary about her mother, Maria, who in 1989 murdered three members of the clergy who tried to perform an exorcism on her. Since then, she’s been shifted to a couple of mental hospitals. When a jury found her innocent by reason of insanity in 1991, she was transferred overseas to Italy to the Centrino Mental Hospital, on whose grounds we now stand. Spooky, huh?

LS: Not really. But go on.

(A guy dressed up in a WINNIE THE POOH costume comes over to them)

WINNIE: Hey fellas, what are you doing in the bushes?

LS: We’re reviewing a movie. Now go away kid, you bother me.

WINNIE: No you’re not! You’re looking for honey! I know it! I know it! Well, you better share it with me if you find some.

NC: Seriously, we’re not looking for honey. We’re reviewing a movie.

LS: Yeah, get lost you simpleton!

WINNIE: You guys sure are mean! I hate you both! (he runs away, crying)

NC: Now look what you did. He’s probably going to go tell one of the guards.

LS: Then you better go on with the review, right?

NC: Along with her cameraman, Isabella gets to visit her mother for the first time in over ten years. The head doctor of the hospital shows Isabella footage of her mother’s violent rages (all captured on security camera from her room)…

LS: I have to admit, I laughed out loud during this scene. Possessed people are pretty funny.

NC: …and yet, for some reason still allows Isabella and her cameraman to enter the room, warning them not to mention anything about God or religion. If THE DEVIL INSIDE has one major problem, it’s the too “easy access;” there are a few sequences where the audience is asked to accept a bit too much, but for now we’ll let that slide.

Suzan Crowley is simply fantastic as the possessed mother, Maria, and in this first meeting creates a real tension-filled scene.

Isabella goes to an exorcism class at a Vatican-run school, and is impressed at the variety of people in attendance. She is befriended by two rogue Catholic priests, who eventually reveal they perform exorcisms without the church’s permission, in an attempt to help people; apparently THEY can tell when certain people are genuinely possessed regardless of what the church says. Part of what made THE DEVIL INSIDE work for me are these two priests, Ben and David. They’re both flawed, yet seem to want to do the right thing. Ben’s more aggravated with the church than David is, but they both compliment one another’s work, Ben taking a strictly religious angle, while David (who is also a licensed physician) also uses scientific methods during their exorcisms.

LS: Yeah, I liked Ben and David, too. In fact, I thought all the cast were really good here. The trick in these kinds of movies is to seem as natural as possible. This is supposed to be documentary footage (even if it really isn’t). And everyone does a fine job convincing us of their sincerity. I also like Isabella and her mother a lot, too.

NC: My favorite sequence is when Fathers Ben and David take Isabella (and her cameraman) to witness a real exorcism. Possessed girl Rosa (played with grueling detail by real life contortionist Bonnie Morgan) delivers an insane performance as our two priests attempt to deliver her from a demon. As far as possession films go, this scene is worth the price of admission.

LS: Yeah, that was a good scene. I didn’t know she was a contortionist, but that makes the scene all the more impressive. Nice that it wasn’t all special effects for once.

(A short guy in a uniform comes over to them. He has one hand inside his coat and thinks he’s NAPOLEON)

NAPOLEON: What are you doing zere in ze bushes?

LS: Not another nut. Can’t we review a movie in peace?

NAPOLEON: How dare you, sir. Napoleon Bonaparte is not, how you say, a “nut.” And I know what you are doing. You are spies lurking in ze bushes, spying on Napoleon, trying to discover ze plans I have to take over Europe. I dare you to deny it!

LS: I deny it.

NC: Me, too.

NAPOLEON: Liars! You will get ze guillotine for this! I will go find ze guards.

LS: We better wrap this up.

NC: When our priests manage to convince the head of the Centrino Mental Hospital to let them have a couple of hours alone with Isabella and her mother, he reluctantly agrees and we’re set for yet another intense exorcism scene, this time even more violent and revealing. BUT, this was one of the film’s hard-to-accept moments—the one rule the doctor imposes on Isabella is that Maria is not supposed to be reminded of God or religion—but two priests are allowed to spend time alone with her?

LS: And it’s not like they’re there just to visit her. They perform an exorcism. Even if Maria is really mentally ill, isn’t this going to make her incredibly hostile?

NC: If not for another great (attempted) exorcism scene here, this would have been unforgiveable (pun intended). And I’m betting most horror fans just won’t go for this idea.

LS: I don’t know. I didn’t think it was logical either, but the scene is so good, I got sucked into it anyway.

NC: (POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT) Another scene that jades an otherwise intelligent possession film is when Father David almost commits murder during a baptism. There is simply NO WAY he would ever have been able to leave the church, be it by the police or his fellow clergy holding him back.

LS: Not to mention angry family members.

NC: But he manages to return to his apartment as if nothing happened, and when Father Ben asks him why he did what he did, Isabella answers on his behalf with the goofiest piece of dialogue I’ve heard in years. “Well, he’s been under a lot of stress lately.” I will admit at this point that if this wasn’t about exorcism, I most likely would have been completely turned off to the rest of the film. I don’t know how many others will be as forgiving (another pun!).

LS: Yeah, that was a pretty dumb thing for her to say. And enough with the puns!

(Another patient walks over to the hedges. It’s a tall man wearing only a white bathrobe with sandals and black socks. He says “Whooooo’s there?” like an owl then begins to jump up and down, singing the Tom Jones song, IT’S NOT UNUSUAL.)

NC: Looks like we’ve been spotted again.

LS: Damn, I hate these bushes. When you said we were going to Rome, I imagined seeing the Colliseum, not hiding in bushes.

NC: Well, despite all its flaws, I have to admit I was impressed with much of the early dialogue given in THE DEVIL INSIDE about exorcism, and I’m assuming this is part of what might turn off horror film fans who aren’t big on possession films; if this isn’t your thing, you’re not going to be interested, and hence will be less forgiving when the flaws come.

That said, THE DEVIL INSIDE has a fun time with its security footage, police file footage, and at-the-moment video footage, and does so in quite an entertaining manner. Isabella (played by the very attractive Fernanda Andrade) delivers a fine performance, and while I’ve read some negative things about the priests, I thought they both did a fine job.

LS: I avoided any reviews of this, as I usually do, before I saw it. It helped that this one wasn’t screened for critics before it was released, so there weren’t a lot of reviews before the weekend.

NC: I never read reviews before seeing a film, either, but after the screening I attended I noticed the Internet was PACKED with negative reviews.

I must admit that I LOVED the ending. I’ve heard most test audiences booed it, but to me, a horror film’s ending should be bleak and shocking. The audience I saw this with was speechless.

****(Another SPOILER ALERT. However, it is impossible to discuss the main problem with this particular movie – and why audience members have been so angry – without discussing the ending)****

LS: I think you’re talking about the last scene, which I thought was fine. It is supposed to be “found footage,” after all. But the actual ending itself —if you really love how the movie ends—then we’re in complete disagreement. When I saw the movie, people were very pissed off with the ending, and I completely understood where they were coming from. I don’t usually discuss the ending of a film when reviewing it, but in this case, I’ll make an exception, mainly because THERE IS NO ENDING.

The movie has been doing a good job sucking you in. It was much better than I expected—especially since January is a notorious time to release the real stinkers that studios have in the vaults. This one was an exception to that rule. The audience was really getting into it and invested themselves in the story. And then the movie ends very abruptly at a key scene, and the URL for a website comes onscreen. We’re told this “found footage” was currently under investigation and to go to the website for more news. This ending elicits two reactions simultaneously:

On the one hand, if you’ve been enjoying the movie up to this point, the abrupt non-ending is going to leave you wanting more. This is presumably a good thing, especially if the filmmakers want to turn this movie into a franchise, like the PARANORMAL ACTIVITY films.

On the other hand, this kind of ending is pretty cynical. First off, it has “sequel” written all over it. It wants you to pay more money to see more in the next movie. The URL pretty much is a stand-in here for the words “TO BE CONTINUED,” and after sitting through this movie and giving it your time, this kind of ending seems like a complete slap in the face. At least give us an ending that satisfies us! That makes us feel like this whole journey hasn’t been a complete waste of time and a grab for our wallets!

When I saw the movie, the theater was packed. So obviously, people are going out to see this one. At the end, everyone was angry and cursing at the screen and felt cheated. Not exactly the best way to generate word of mouth buzz about a movie. In fact, even though I liked the movie, I found the ending insulting and it kind of ruined it for me.

NC: Well, to me the ENDING was the final IMAGE on the screen. However, I’m a bit mixed on what happens AFTER the ending. That website is given (therossifiles.com) for viewers to go to to learn more about the continuing Rossi case. One of the biggest questions in the film (which asks what happened between Father Ben and his late uncle, who was his exorcist mentor) is answered on the website in a video confession. I believe this confession could have been intercut with the film’s last scenes, and would have left more viewers satisfied. Personally, I would have been happy if this was NEVER explained, as it gives the film a sense of mystery that added to the tension.

LS: Personally, I didn’t think that was one of the biggest questions of the film—and I don’t care if that was explained or not either. But I’ll tell you, for some reason I have no desire to go to the website— I paid my money. Everything important should have been on the damn screen! I shouldn’t have to go searching for answers that should have been provided in the film itself.

NC: THE DEVIL INSIDE—with its post-Internet participation—becomes a gimmick film that wasn’t advertised as one. Pretty cool IMO, although, again, I can see viewers not getting into it.

LS: Cool? The gimmick actually lowered the rating on this one, for me. I thought the ending sucked enough to ruin an otherwise solid exorcism film.

NC: As someone who has seen about twenty EXORCIST-rip offs and a dozen more possession films, I give THE DEVIL INSIDE~two and a half knives. The screenwriters should have thought a bit more about the couple of easily-avoidable flaws in their script. It’s easy to understand why many people will not be happy with this film. But if you can let these issues slide, there’s plenty of spooky fun to be had.

LS: I had a hard time rating this one. On the one hand, I was going to give it three knives, up until the ending. I guess I liked it even more than you did. But after the rip-off at the end, I was angry enough to give it just two knives. If I’m fair and split the difference, I guess I end up giving it two and a half knives, as well. But seriously, screw the gimmick of making us go to a website to find out more. Show it on the damn screen. I bet this gimmick angered enough people to generate some negative buzz—not good for future box office, or possible sequels. People just don’t like feeling cheated, especially these days when ticket prices are so damn high. But I enjoyed this movie a lot until that point. So my advice to our readers is this—wait and rent it. You won’t be as pissed off spending $5 to rent it on DVD or streaming video when the dumbass non-ending occurs, than you would if you and your date had spent $20 to go see it in a theater.

NC: (Answers his cell phone) “Yes Antonio…we’re just about done here. We’ll be over in a few minutes.” L.L….get ready for some old school, home-made pasta…hopefully without a pea soup appetizer!

(NAPOLEON comes running back, escorted by two hospital guards dressed in white)

NAPOLEON: Zere are ze spies I told you about. They want to know what Napoleon has planned next. Well, you will never know, you evil spies!

GUARD 1: Hey, what are you guys doing in the bushes?

GUARD 2: Yeah! Aren’t you guys I just tossed out of the lobby?

(LS and NC jump out of the bushes and run away, being pursued by the guards, Napoleon and the guy dressed as Winnie The Pooh, while fast “Benny Hill” exit music plays)

LS: See you next time on Cinema Knife Fight!

-END-

L.L. Soares gives THE DEVIL INSIDE ~ two and a half knives!

Nick Cato gives THE DEVIL INSIDE~ two and a half knives

5 Comments »

THE RITE

Posted in 2011, Cinema Knife Fights, Devil Movies, Exorcism Movies with tags alice braga, anthony hopkins, Colin O'Donoghue, Demonic Possession, exorcism, Inspired by a True Story, Matt Baglio, Michael Petroni, Mikael Hafstrom, Possessed Priest, The Rite on January 31, 2011 by knifefighter

CINEMA KNIFE FIGHT: THE RITE (2011)
by Michael Arruda and L.L. Soares

(The Scene: The interior of a darkened room. The shades are drawn and the door is closed . L.L. SOARES is tied to a chair . MICHAEL ARRUDA, dressed as a priest, stands over him.)

MA: Tell me your name, demon!

LS: Never! Get out of my face, priest!

(MA splashes LS with holy water . LS licks his lips.)

LS: Mmm . Lemon flavored. I rather like that.

MA: Stick to the script .

LS: The props department actually gave us lemon-flavored holy water?

MA: The usual crew’s on vacation. Someone new is working props this week.

(CUT to DONKEY and SHREK playing around inside the prop room.

DONKEY: How about some lemon-flavored holy water?

SHREK: I don’t know, Donkey. I don’t think they drink it.

DONKEY: Don’t drink it? What else do they do it with it? Splash it on their foreheads or something?

Cut back to MA and LS.)

MA: Demon, tell me your name!

LS (Curly voice): Sointantly! I’m the devil. I go by many names. Lucifer. Beelzebub. Jay Leno!

MA: Begone! That was easy. Now that that’s over with (unties LS) let’s get on with our review.

Today, we’re reviewing THE RITE (2011) the latest movie about exorcists, this one starring Anthony Hopkins. I did not have high hopes for this one, as I didn’t expect it to come close to last year’s excellent and very scary exorcist movie, THE LAST EXORCISM (2010), but I have to admit, I was surprised.

THE RITE is the story of young Michael Kovak (Colin O’Donoghue). He lives with and works for his mortician dad (Rutger Hauer), a life he really wants to escape from, so he decides to enter the seminary because, as he tells his friend, in his family the men either become morticians or priests. Michael admits to having lots of doubts in terms of his faith, and so he fully expects that after four years in the seminary, he most likely will drop out.

After four years, he decides to do just that, but his advisor priest tells him he sees lots of potential in him and doesn’t want him to leave the priesthood. He asks Michael to give the vocation one more chance and go to Rome to take a course in exorcism, and then make his final decision. Michael accepts the offer, and when he continues to express his doubts in Rome, the priest there teaching the course on exorcism, Father Xavier (Cirian Hinds, who played Julius Caesar in HBO’s series ROME), sends him to work with Father Lucas Trevant (Anthony Hopkins) an eccentric local priest and very experienced exorcist.

Trevant is anything but conventional. He invites Michael to take part in an exorcism within moments of meeting him; in the middle of an exorcism he answers his cell phone; and he is, by all accounts, an odd fellow, but there is something charismatic about him, perhaps his honesty in acknowledging that he too has doubts.

At first, Michael continues to be skeptical, but then weird things begin to happen that make Michael think twice about his lack of faith. To add fuel to the fire, Father Lucas himself becomes possessed by a demon, and suddenly Michael has lost his mentor to the other side. He enlists the aid of a reporter, Angeline (Alice Braga), he had befriended earlier in the exorcism class, and the two of them together confront the evil that is stalking Michael and Father Lucas.

(LS snores loudly)

MA: Hey, wake up!

LS: Huh? You were putting me to sleep.

MA: Uh oh. I guess that means you didn’t like this one, but I’m not surprised . There weren’t any scenes of torture in it.

Again, I was pleasantly surprised by THE RITE. I did not think I was going to like it, but I have to say, I did.

First of all, I found the story believable….

(LS laughs hysterically)

MA: Let me finish before you choke to death on your funny bone—I’m not just talking about the good and evil stuff, as in whether one believes in God or the devil . I’m talking about that I believed in these characters and their beliefs and doubts. They were convincing, as was the story. It’s a solid story, and while it’s not flat out scary, it is kinda creepy. There’s an undercurrent of dread throughout this film.

(Someone knocks at the door)

MA: Come in!

(A very pregnant Italian girl enters)

GIRL: I am here for my exorcism.

MA: Sorry, the exorcist is on a lunch break. We’re doing a movie review here.

GIRL: That’s okay. I’ll wait. (She sits down on the chair LS was previously sitting in)

MA: The other thing I liked is it didn’t go overboard with the exorcism scenes. These scenes didn’t come off as fake, where we see priests acting like Jedi knights, fighting off demons and the devil, as if they’re supervillains. The exorcism scenes in THE RITE were realistic, in that nothing that happened in the scenes jumped out at me as phony. I wasn’t thinking “that would never happen.” And that’s why this one remained subtly disturbing; there was a strong sense of realism throughout.

LS: Realism? No, wrong word. You must mean boredom. Because the exorcism scenes just never go far enough. They seem on the verge of really turning into something, but they never cross the line into real scares.

MA: So, you’re saying that a movie can’t be scary if it’s not graphic? I don’t agree with that at all .

LS: Stop putting words in my mouth! (begins to choke and then spits up plastic words onto the ground)

Ouch. No, I wasn’t saying things have to be graphic to be scary. But this movie would have been a lot better if it had the balls to take its premise all the way.

Of course the limitations of the PG-13 rating don’t help. What that means is that instead of spouting real profanity, the possessed souls spout gibberish which is a mix of “acceptable” swear words (for the rating) and nonsense that sounds like swearing.

MA: So, if a demon doesn’t say four letter words, it’s not realistic? That doesn’t make any sense.

LS: Actually, it does. And, in this movie, the sexuality also just goes so far – but doesn’t cross a line.

MA: That’s right. No boobs . I guess you don’t like this movie then!

LS: If you’re possessed by a demon – chances are pretty good you are going to have some extreme behavior that is going to go beyond the limits of PG-13. This movie always seemed on the verge of wanting to cross over into truly disturbing territory, but it never does. It wimps out repeatedly. In turn, the “scary” scenes never get really scary. We know they will only go so far. And the most we get in the way of unsettling imagery is people spitting up iron nails.

MA: Last time I checked, a person spitting up iron nails is kinda unnerving.

LS: Not really. I thought it was kind of lame.

MA: The acting was excellent. I thought Anthony Hopkins more than made up for his subpar performance in THE WOLFMAN (2010). He created a very memorable character in Father Lucas . While I don’t think Father Lucas is quite as dynamic a character as the Rev. Cotton Marcus in THE LAST EXORCISM, he’s pretty darn close. Whereas Marcus considered exorcisms to be phony and went through the motions to satisfy his “customers,” Lucas believes in the demons he’s fighting . Lucas is a much more deeply haunted character than Cotton Marcus, and Hopkins does a terrific job bringing this character to life.

LS: Okay, maybe his performance in THE WOLFMAN wasn’t the best, but that was certainly a better movie than this one.

MA: I thought THE RITE had a tighter story, but I wasn’t really comparing the movies, just Hopkins’s performance in them.

LS: You’re right. The acting in THE RITE is very good. Hopkins is fine. So is Colin O’Donoghue as Michael, and I liked Alice Braga a lot as the reporter, Angeline. My problem isn’t with them. My problem is with the script. It’s a friggin snoozefest.

(Suddenly, the GIRL starts screaming. Her legs rise and a BABY’s head pokes out from between them.)

BABY (in a gruff voice): Do you guys mind? I’m trying to sleep in here.

LS: Everyone’s a critic.

MA: I also appreciated the fact that once Father Lucas becomes possessed, the film didn’t deteriorate into a silly “good vs. evil” melodrama. What happens to Lucas is consistent with the story, and how Lucas reacts during the possession is also very realistic. He doesn’t become Bad Ass Devil Villain from Hell . He’s simply Father Lucas possessed by a demon. He’s not running through the streets trying to take over the world.

LS: Yeah, Father Lucas is possessed by a demon. An incredibly wimpy demon who really doesn’t know how to generate real scares. He has a few good moments, but overall, the possession scenes were a letdown.

BABY: Yeah!

MA (to BABY): You’re annoying, and you’re not even born yet! I disagree about the exorcism scenes. I thought they were adequate enough.

LS: Adequate. What a ringing endorsement!

(BABY laughs)

MA: As you pointed out, Colin O’Donoghue delivered a strong performance as Michael Kovak. Again, it comes down to believability. I believed in his character’s doubts . I also enjoyed how Kovak doubted at every turn, and how he was quick to express these doubts, telling Father Lucas that the girl they were helping needed a doctor not a priest, to which Lucas quickly quipped, “I am a doctor.” I was happy to go along with Kovak on his journey, and this was because of both O’Donoghue’s performance and the writing.

LS: Yes, O’Donoghue is very good in this movie. I liked his character, too. Too bad he wasn’t in a better movie.

MA: And yes, Alice Braga was also very good as the reporter Angeline. We saw Braga in a couple of movies last year, PREDATORS (2010) and REPO MEN (2010). She was good in both those films, and she’s good here in THE RITE. And it’s always fun seeing Rutger Hauer in a movie, as he remains one of my favorite actors, even though his role here as Michael’s father is not very big.

Michael Petroni wrote the screenplay based on a book by Matt Baglio, and for the most part, I thought it was a decent script. Petroni created a very memorable character in Father Lucas, brought to life by Anthony Hopkins, and he crafted a story that remained convincing throughout. I could have done without the “inspired by true events” at the beginning. These words appear so much in movies nowadays it’s almost like writing “this is a horror movie” on the screen, or “inspired by thoughts in the writer’s head.” If it’s not a documentary, I’m really not all that interested in knowing that true events might have inspired it. After all, isn’t this the case with most fiction? Duh!

THE RITE was directed by Mikael Hafstrom, and he proved adept at the helm. There were a lot of neat and memorable images in this one. I liked the demonic donkey, which sounds goofy, but in the film it’s anything but.

DONKEY (Pokes head out from behind a curtain): I knew there was a reason I was appearing in this column today, other than my good looks!

LS: Actually, it was a mule. And yeah, I liked it too.

DONKEY: Mule, donkey, what’s the difference! Who cares! I still get to be here!

LS: (His eyes suddenly turn bright red) Possessed animals are cool.

BABY: Yeah!

DONKEY: YIKES! (runs away)

MA: The exorcism scenes were handled well, as they were scary without going over the top .

LS: Actually, when a demon possesses someone in a movie, going “over the top” is exactly what should be happening. All HELL should break loose. Demons aren’t mannered and adhere to boundaries of good taste. They go wild. Not once in this movie does anyone go wild. And you’re right, there are exactly zero scares in this movie.

MA: Yes, that was one area where THE RITE could have been better . It’s not all that scary.

LS: You think?

MA: But getting back to the “over the top” comment again. I’m talking about movies like EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING (2004) where the exorcism scenes were overdramatic and phony. I thought the scenes here were low-key, yes, but they were realistic and a bit creepy.

And I don’t think THE RITE fails as a scary movie. I mean, it’s not an in-your-face- scarefest . It’s more of a “quiet horror” story.

LS: Quiet? Try mute!

MA: I thought there was an undercurrent of discomfort throughout THE RITE. While I wouldn’t describe it as edge-of-your-seat by any means, still, you could find yourself with a sweaty palm or two.

LS: Maybe you did.

MA: It moves at a deliberate pace, and it takes its time telling its story.

LS: Deliberate pace? That’s a nice way of saying it’s very drawn out and slow and boring, right? Because that’s how I saw it.

MA: I wasn’t bored . I was captivated pretty much from start to finish, again, because of the solid writing, acting, and directing.

LS: That makes one of us.

MA: One question I did have about the story is why would the demon take so much interest in Michael in the first place? Michael was a skeptic who didn’t believe in the devil. Now, since this was the case, if the demon had simply left Michael alone, Michael wouldn’t even give him the time of day. Why bother? To me, the demon would have benefited by Michael remaining a skeptic.

LS: You’re wondering why the demon in this movie isn’t smarter? No one said a demon has to be smart, Michael. They aren’t forced to take IQ tests.

MA: No, I’m saying it’s a plot point in this movie that’s questionable because the demon goes after Michael, seemingly trying to get him to believe in him, which when you think about it, will only lead to Michael’s believing in God as well, which is not going to help the demon’s cause. But I guess that’s what demons do. They go after people whether they believe or not, which is actually a point Father Lucas makes in the movie.

LS: No, this is not what demons do. This is what demons do when a writer makes them do it so that we get this forced plotline of an unbeliever forced to become a believer. It’s the same old tired redemption plot we’ve seen a hundred times. I liked Michael, but I couldn’t care less if he got faith. The entire movie seems like a recruitment commercial for the Church. Maybe exorcism will look exciting and more men will sign up for the priesthood.

BABY: Yeah, a commercial. Just like there’s an obvious moment in the movie that is advertising McDonald’s.

LS: Exactly!

MA: Can you two stop chit-chatting so I can finish my point? Jeesh! The demon’s focusing on Michael was counterintuitive to me . I could see the demon wanting to get back at Father Lucas, since he had performed so many exorcisms, but Michael didn’t believe to begin with.

LS: Don’t strain your brain too much about this. It’s not worth it.

MA: But all in all, I liked THE RITE a lot . I thought it was a solid piece of storytelling, well-acted, and well-written. Definitely check this one out. I give it three knives.

LS: That’s funny, because it’s almost like we saw different movies. I thought this movie was a complete bore. It moved too slow. Nothing ever goes far enough. There are no scares. I thought the acting was very good, but not good enough to save a very weak script. I thought the best scenes were when Father Trevant tries to exorcize a pregnant Italian girl (Marta Gastini). These scenes are the only ones that even come close to pushing the envelope, although they stop short before they can push us into “R” rated territory.

I wanted more from this movie. I wanted scares. There wasn’t one moment when I felt the characters were in real danger. The scenes where Hopkins’ character are possessed just seemed like a babbling old man who had lost his marbles (with some CGI lines growing on his face to look spooky). I wanted this one to really cut loose. It never does. And the pacing is just way too slow.

The direction by Mikael Hafstrom is fine, and the movie looks good. It’s the script that is the fatal flaw here. It’s just much too restrained and weak for the subject matter.

Ironically, the only good exorcism movie I’ve seen in the last ten years was THE LAST EXORCISM, which you mentioned earlier. Ironic, because that movie was also rated PG-13 and had the same limitations on what we could be shown. And yet it worked. It worked surprisingly well within its boundaries. But I’m thinking that was a fluke. I doubt we’ll see too many more PG rated exorcism movies that are any good.

MA: I completely disagree. THE RITE worked.

LS: When we’re talking about demons, we are talking about creatures capable of extreme behavior. They want to scare us. They want to shock us. Just look at the king of this genre, THE EXORCIST (1973). There’s a reason why that movie is still such an iconic classic. At the time it came out, it pushed boundaries aside with ease and gave people something they’d never seen before. it freaked people out! THE RITE offers us nothing new, nothing we haven’t seen before.

MA: Yeah, because in THE EXORCIST it’s not just a demon possessing the Linda Blair character, it’s the devil himself, and so things were supposed to be more extreme.

LS: In contrast, there is NOTHING shocking or scary about THE RITE. It’s just a showcase for good actors working with a slow, tedious, unscary script. It’ll make you sleepy! I give this movie one knife. And that’s mainly for the acting. Don’t waste your money seeing this one in a movie theater. Wait for it to come to Netflix or cable.

MA: No, no, no . Go see this one. This is exactly the kind of horror movie horror fans should be supporting . High production values, solid acting, and a decent story are all in this package. Just because it doesn’t jump out at you with traditional shock scenes doesn’t mean it’s not enjoyable. See it!

Well, it looks like we had very different reactions to this one.

LS: Yeah. I’m right and your wrong. That was easy enough.

MA: What’s with the right and wrong crap? I liked it, and you didn’t.

BABY: Good review, you two. But can you guys leave now? I wanna come out of my momma’s womb, and I’m shy. I don’t want you to see me naked.

MA : Shy? You haven’t shut up since you stuck your head out!

LS: We’re done anyway. Let’s go Michael. Let’s give them some privacy.

MA: Gladly.

(They leave)

—END—

Michael Arruda gave THE RITE – 3 knives

LL Soares gave THE RITE – 1 knife

7 Comments »

Archive for the Exorcism Movies Category

THIS IS THE END (2013)

THE LAST EXORCISM PART II (2013)

Cinema Knife Fight COMING ATTRACTIONS for March 2013

A HAUNTED HOUSE (2012)

THE WORST MOVIES OF 2012 by L.L. Soares

V/H/S (2012)

Suburban Grindhouse Memories: SUPERSTITION (1985)

PETER DUDAR’S BEST MOVIES OF 2011

THE DEVIL INSIDE (2012)

THE RITE

Pages

Follow “”