Exorcismo

If you're planning to watch a horror film, this is definitely not the one to choose. The production seems to have mistakenly categorized it under the horror genre instead of drama. Out of the 100-minute runtime, the film dedicates a mere 15 minutes to horror, while the remaining 85 minutes are purely drama. Watching this in theaters feels like a waste of time and money if you're expecting a spine-chilling horror experience. Given the minimal horror content, the price of this movie should be Rs 15, reflecting the 15 minutes that are worth watching.

The acting is commendable, but this only holds true if you approach the movie as a drama. The performances are solid and engaging in the context of a dramatic narrative, but if you're hoping for terrifying scenes and suspenseful moments, you'll be sorely disappointed. The film is painfully slow for a horror movie, lacking the tension and thrills that are characteristic of the genre.

One of the most significant drawbacks is its lack of relevance to the previous movie in the series. Fans who are looking for continuity and connections to the earlier installment will find none. This disconnection makes the movie feel disjointed and leaves viewers questioning its place in the series. It's almost as if the filmmakers decided to create a standalone drama but then labeled it as part of the horror series to attract a larger audience.

The storyline itself is unremarkable and fails to evoke any real fear or suspense. The plot meanders through various dramatic elements, focusing on character development and interpersonal relationships. While these aspects might be interesting in a different genre, they simply don't work in a movie that is supposed to be horror. The 15 minutes of horror that the film does offer are clichéd and predictable, lacking the originality and creativity needed to make a lasting impact.

Moreover, the pacing is incredibly slow, dragging through scenes that add little to the overall narrative. This slow pacing is a significant detriment in a horror film, where timing and rhythm are crucial to building tension and maintaining the audience's engagement. Instead of feeling on the edge of their seats, viewers are likely to find themselves bored and restless, waiting for something, anything, to happen.

The film's setting and atmosphere also fail to contribute to a sense of fear or unease. The locations and cinematography are more suited to a drama, with warm lighting and intimate settings that don't lend themselves to creating a spooky or ominous mood. The music, too, is more melodramatic than menacing, further reinforcing the feeling that you're watching a drama rather than a horror film.

If you have no plans and nowhere else to go, and maybe if you have some time to waste, then perhaps you might consider watching it. But even in that case, it would be with the understanding that you're not going to experience a traditional horror film. For those who value their time and are looking for a genuine horror experience, it's best to spend your valuable time elsewhere. There are plenty of other films that deliver true horror and are worth watching.

In conclusion, this film is a disappointment for horror enthusiasts. Its misclassification, slow pace, and lack of relevance to its predecessor make it a poor choice for a horror movie night. The drama elements might be appreciated by some, but they don't belong in a film marketed as horror. Save your time and money for a film that truly delivers on its promise of thrills and scares. This one, unfortunately, does not.

I know that this film was technically being worked on before the serviceable pope's exorcist last year, but I find it funny that Crowe took both nearly exact roles as an exorcist in a 4 year span. This is a guy that won an Oscar that was once held as a top five actor in the 2000s. That's not to say he still can't act well because in both of these films, he carries it with his tenacious intensity and dedication to the character. It just seems peculiar that he's not in really any other films.

While, this film doesn't do anything particularly different and the cliches run amok . It's still a passable exorcism movie with captivating enough visuals and ok story to keep you intertwined. The supporting cast is actually rather great as well. Sam Worthington proves once again he's quite underrated and never truly got the respect he deserved. Crowe of course pours every bit he has into these films and while I'd like to see him get other roles if that's even possible, he has found a particular niche As the go to aging exorcist.

The scene setting to start was good, strong pacing and intriguing.

Unfortunately it never developed from there...loose story line, there was never any reason behind the occurrences of the film.

What relation did any of the references have to the story line? You'd have to see it for this to be a spoiler... and I don't personally think you should...

What happened to the characters?

Would I recommend this film? Simply put, no, spend your money watching something else!

It's a shame watching a film with Russell Crowe headlining and coming away from it saying.. why has he decided to star in this movie? Is this a sign his acting career has possibly seen better days?

If you want a few cheap jump scares go for it, but you've been warned!!

It seems that Russell Crowe has recently found his turn in films about devil exorcism. He recently made The Pope's Exorcist in 2023. People quickly think that this film is a sequel to that and that is absolutely not the case. In fact, this film had been ready to be released since 2019, but was pushed over to a release in 2024. So The Exorcism was already made a lot earlier than The Pope's Exorcist. The film is directed by Joshua John Miller and whoever has done a bit of his homework finds out that this is Jason Miller's son. Jason Miller played the role of Father Damien Karras in the absolute classic of the devil's 1973 exorcist film The Exorcist. The funny thing is that Joshua John Miller is making a remake of The Exorcist in the film, only with a different title. Anyway, the film sounds interesting and we are getting set up for an exciting horror movie, at least...

The film has a fairly original story about a lowered actor who tries to find his way back up in the film world. After his wife has died and Anthony Miller finally has his alcohol addiction under control, he is offered the role of a priest in a film about devil expulsion after a bizarre incident. Together with his estranged daughter Lee, he starts the project full of good hope. For a short film of just an hour and a half, the film takes a huge run-up and it really takes almost an hour before something really starts to happen. This will greatly disappoint many viewers, especially if you are going to expect a movie like The Pope's Exorcist or The Exorcist. This film is a true slow burner and a lot of time is taken to deepen everything. A number of peripheral cases are also cited in this where you can question of course, because what the added value of daughter Lee's lesbian relationship is in this film is a big riddle and really adds absolutely nothing to the film.

Crowe shows that he really still understands his acting profession. In the last half hour, Anthony becomes possessed by a demon and Father Conor's help is called in. This role is played by David Hyde Pierce, who may know people better than Frasier's brother, Dr. Niles Crane from the comedy series of the same name Frasier. That part becomes a lot more entertaining, but the final plot is a bit far-fetched and actually quite ridiculous. A made up demon for the film really seems to exist and has therefore taken possession of Anthony's body. Now Father Conor, Lee and her lesbian friend together have to drive out the devil who has taken possession of Anthony. Still, it's quite a shame that the film has such a course, because for the rest the film was reasonable and it really seemed like something on the way. The final course may be too predictable for words and you can actually guess. Especially if you are familiar with genre peers that I mentioned earlier in this piece.

The Exorcism starts as a slow burner and seems to be on its way to becoming a nice movie, but unfortunately there are a number of things that don't work out well. For example, daughter Lee's lesbian relationship adds absolutely nothing to the big picture, a made-up demon for the fictional film suddenly turns out to really exist and then we are presented with the end. This doesn't really make any sense at all and is also extremely predictable. Is the movie as bad as the first reviews make you believe? No, not that, but we can't speak of a good film. Now it must be said that I didn't really like The Pope's Exorcist a good movie either. It is therefore the huge run-up that takes the film from a good hour that takes the film. Had worked out the ending better and the film would really have been a lot better. If you expect a scary movie about devil extrusion, I recommend that you increase the expectation a lot, otherwise you will be really disappointed.

Anthony Miller (Russell Crowe) gets hired on a movie project which resembles The Exorcist (1973). He's trying to reconnect with his estranged daughter Lee Miller (Ryan Simpkins) and both are still dealing with her mother's death. In addition, Anthony has other past issues which may be resurfacing.

This project probably started with an interesting meta idea. The movie is rather muddled in the beginning, but it is mostly tired. If there is one word to describe this, it is tired. The characters are all tired. The actors are tired. The story feels tired even with its meta covering. This is dark and gloomy and tired.