The Exorcism
audience Reviews
, 36% Audience Score- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsAll bark and no bite! Reminds me a lot of Scott Derrickson’s Sinister in that it’s all visual flair and completely locking of substance, story, and common sense. The only potential audience for this film is none horror fans, and that’s a big if!
- Rating: 1.5 out of 5 starsUna mala película de exorcismo. Perdón, una mala película de una película de exorcismo. Falla en todo lo que no tiene que fallar, llena de incoherencias y lenta. Se puede ver pero con poca expectativa y es bastante olvidable.
- Rating: 2.5 out of 5 starsAnthony Miller é um ator que está tentando voltar ao trabalho, depois de uma série de traumas e problemas: alcoolismo, morte da esposa, drogas. A chance aparece para trabalhar em um filme de terror porém o comportamento de Tony no set e em casa começa a se modificar, despertando suspeitas na sua filha. A primeira coisa que você pensa ao ver o poster do filme é como o Russell Crowe consegue fazer dois filmes seguidos sobre o mesmo tema, no caso O Exorcista do Papa. Inclusive as fotos são bem parecidas. Porém a história é outra. Este filme começou a ser produzido em 2019, mas com a pandemia ele acabou parado e engavetado. Com o sucesso de Crowe no Exorcista do Papa, o estúdio se lembrou deste filme e resolveu trazer de novo. Ao assisti-lo, você percebe que há dois filmes feitos aqui. O primeiro usaria das histórias envolvendo sets amaldiçoados de filmes de terror, como A Profecia, Poltergeist e, mesmo, O Exorcista, filme que é inspiração total para este. O cenário é muito semelhante ao clássico de William Friedkin. Havia diálogos bem interessantes, fazendo algumas críticas a filmes de terror, como o diretor falando que é um filme de drama, mas disfarçado de filme de terror. Então um certo momento, o filme abandona tudo isso e vira um filme de possessão demoníaca como tantos outros. Personagens voltam do nada, somente para serem mortos. Outros somem sem motivo, como é o caso do diretor. O CGI usado para uma cena de possessão é horrível. Lamento ver Crowe fazendo essa série de filmes ruins como Kraven e este filme. Por fim, temos um filme Frankenstein, com boas ideias no início, totalmente abandonadas depois, para virar um filme de terror mediano com jump scares.
- Rating: 5 out of 5 starsCrowe excels in this movie, perhaps some of his best work ever, very intimate with the camera. JJ Miller directed this very well, cinematography is outstanding, creating the REAL horror vibe. All cast excels in character and script is flawless, one of the best movies I've seen. Ignore clichés, they are meant to be used, aren't they? Recommended for sure
- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsA decent idea,but i feel like the studio got involved too much and added the many horror/exorcist cliches that followed the promising start.
- Rating: 0.5 out of 5 starsJust awful , overacted and trying too hard to be scary.Cant under recommend enough.
- Rating: 3.5 out of 5 starsWhen I first saw Crowe on the cover of another exorcism movie, I had thought it was a mistake, for the actor just did The Pope’s Exorcist (71) last year. And yet, here he is again, but instead of playing an exorcist, Crowe plays an actor playing an exorcist for an exorcism movie — his Italian accent did not transfer to this one. Right away, the characters are discussing real tragedies that befell horror movies — The Exorcist, The Omen, Poltergeist — and after the first scene, you’re given a major plot device. Nevertheless, the story does not follow the anticipated trajectory, which is one of the main reasons I can push this movie into the (60)+ recommends. Sure, the message is a blunt tool — Miller (Crowe) has a history of substance abuse, child/family neglect, and childhood sexual assault from the church — but the misdirection is interesting enough and unlike last year’s The Exorcist: Believer (48), the power of Christ really does compel. For the life of me, I cannot comprehend why actors continue to go to the studio set alone, at night, without any lights turned on or why Miller’s daughter (Ryan Simpkins) is still living at home after all the insanity with her father — who she disdains and refuses to even call “Dad” — while he’s clearly unhinged and violent. Although the movie concerns demonic possession and all that comes with it, the truly jaw-dropping moments come the fictional film’s director, Peter (Adam Goldberg), who uses Miller’s traumatic and unsavory past as a device to aid the actor in his role. This is one really for the exorcist subgenre enthusiast.
- Rating: 1 out of 5 starsThis was a successful cooperation by everyone involved to make sure the acting, the directing and the editing, all sucked as bad as the script.
- Rating: 3.5 out of 5 starsIt is far from amazing, but it is definitely not as bad as the reviews say it is.
- Rating: 2 out of 5 starsFrom start to finish, it misses the mark in most areas.