The Crucifixion

I decided to watch this film because I was attracted to the fact that it was based on a true story and that it is connected to Romania, which is very close to my city.

Anyway, the film is quite good. The rating of 5 here really does not reflect the overall experience.

I would give 10 for the setting, the interiors ( especially the room of the possessed girl and the churches and all the rooms ) as they have that 'something' that really stands out.

The acting of all the actors, except the main actress is really good. The main reporter girl is kinda too ... hasty and there was something about her abrupt ways that did not click with me. Maybe she was meant to be like that.

The last ( 2nd exorcism) was kinda non believable while the 1st one was on point.

I am not 100% sure if they filmed all in Romania but it looked that way and that gave extra + to the story.

My rating is 8. The film was entertaining and interesting 99% of the time.

Production is done well, acting is good. This takes a more realistic perspective in the idea of demon possession and exorcism as it uses the Eastern European background and culture to spin doubt well. That being said, the story is somewhat standard and thus bordering on perfunctory in terms of the tropes that are consistent within all possession films. Otherwise a decent watch.

I can't really tell how I feel about this movie. On the one hand it tries to be a remake of The Exorcism of Emily Rose, and they shouldn't try that. That one was a masterpiece. Secondly, they shoot the Romania scenes in Transylvania, the actual events took place in Moldova. This is like shooting a western in Manhattan. Then, they portray Romania in general to be like in the 1800s. It reminded me of the Amish. Of course, even in villages, Romanians don't live like that. They didn't use Romanians to play the roles, so the acvent of some of them when they speak Romanian are devastating. The acting overall is average, but not as bad as some say here

Not the most exciting film, it's a horror mystery, that's more mystery than horror and the mystery was not that interesting. It was about a faithless journalist trying to prove God is not real by doing a story about a Priest in jail for murder because an exorcism went wrong. Sounds like a good story. The setting of the movie also seemed good as it takes place in Romania, during a holiday that, according to the film is similar to Halloween, and when I herd this at the beginning of the film I was jazzed to watch a Halloween picture during the season.  The Crucifixion shows a lot of elements of mystery and sexuality that makes if feel like a homage of Hammer Horror, but it falls a little short from become a classic of even a cult classic, real short.

What the hell is this crap? What happened here?

This is so by the numbers, so bland, so boring. Check it out: every single jump scare in this movie, which is pretty much every single "scare", is accomplished with an ear piercingly loud sound. Seriously. Every time. A car horn. A dogs bark. A bang on a door. And the sound is so ridiculously loud, while the talking is super low. Man I was just so effing angry. It pains your ears. And the sound is not even accompanied by scary imagery! Most of the times it's just a fake scare. With SUCH loud noise. JEEEZ.

The best thing about the movie is Sophie Cookson. She does the best she can with a very uninteresting and boring script. There is very little gore, the little there is is OK. There are a couple of effects, they also work. But all in all it's just very tame. The story, I think, leans on being "true". Unfortunately it's still boring.

I should probably give this a lower score, but if my mood were better I think I might have enjoyed it more. Also, the movie does have some qualities, it's just all to by the numbers.