Demoníaca

Acting: actually very, very good. Cinematography: again, A+. Special effects: that all depends on your taste of blood and gore. Personally, I thought it had some gruesome parts, but not over the top. Here's why I only rated it an 8 out of 10: scare factor. In the beginning of the movie, the mystery of the entity is definitely malevolent and seems to enjoy taking its time before a kill. Cool concept. But as the movie moves along, the scares become more predictable and the main characters, as seemingly level headed as they are, don't act rationally, in my opinion, and then the movie becomes a house of cards at the end and collapses without a proper ending. I'm trying not to give too much away because I don't want you to think it's a bad movie. Just could have been better, and that was disappointing. I would, however, recommend it as there are not many options for good movies period right now. Compared to some of the other junk I've had to endure lately, this is like the Hope Diamond.

Roger Ebert once said, "It's not what a film is about, but how it is about it." I had to take that into consideration when rating and reviewing 'The Dark and the Wicked'. This is admittedly not my type of horror movie. I struggle with supernatural horror, because I have zero belief in it and thus it does nothing to unsettle me. However, I have to admit that this film was done very well, and that if I were unsettled by those types of films then this one would have done the trick for me. This film is going up some people's alleys big time.

This is such a beautifully shot film. Director Bryan Bertino is so good at framing what is on screen, he doesn't even need what's on screen to be all that impressive for it to look good. I also love the inventive camera angles he comes up with. They don't always work to heighten the scares or even the tension, but they add a touch of class to the mix which is so often missing in the horror genre.

My biggest gripe with the film would be all the jump-scares and the scenes where the demon is basically just trying to scare the characters rather than harm them. I understand why they have to be there to pad the runtime to 90 minutes, but they are still very frustrating to watch. I also didn't really connect with either of the two lead characters. They were very flat (understandable in their situation to be fair) and that made it difficult for me to care all that much about their fate. The final 20-30 minutes of this film is an absolute blast though I'd have to say. The pacing rockets to life and there are some fun and pretty messed up scenes. 'The Dark and the Wicked' is worth a watch.

The problem with the Horror Genre (as is the case with some other genres), is that it is pretty broad in terms of scope and definition; and that within the definitions which fit, there are too many variables. For example, can a truly well-made "horror" movie include comedic elements? Should it? How much gore should be employed? Do suspense or thrills or adventure add or take away from the genre? There is no clear-cut response to any of this, and so what appeals to one horror-fan, may not be as appealing to another.

FOR ME, what defines a horror flick - gory or not - is that it should make the tiny hairs on the back of my neck stand up in fear. The Dark and The Wicked did that and more. I am in no way exaggerating when I say that 1. I FELT scared to the point of wondering if I was entertaining 'energies' I should not entertain by watching it; 2. I wondered if I should turn it off; and 3. I said a couple of prayers and rebuked the devil at one point near the ending. Even now, I just got goosebumps.

Now - will everyone find it as "scary"? By the reviews. It's obvious some people did not. Who knows. Maybe there was some subconscious or phycological trigger it touched on in my mind which just "worked". Regardless, in my opinion, it deserves a higher score than its current 6.1 IMDB rating.

The GOOD: The acting by the two leads who play brother and sister, is nothing short of FANTASTIC. The storyline too, is pretty great in that it is different enough to not immediately remind me of anything else like it. The cinematography deserves praise, and for the most part, the dialogue is in the category of good. As for the (jump) "scares", we've seen them before. I don't blame them for this, as what really in cinema today has not been DONE before? The pace however, is also good and it allows for the tension to build up between these 'scares' (for lack of a better word). In as far as realism (a big part of cinema for me), this film earns MOSTLY top marks. While there are instances where you second-guess the actions people take or do not take AND there is a major plot device to do with a country doctor, which fails (I will not give too much away in order to avoid a spoiler), it's all in the realm of believable and it makes you wonder what you would do in the same situation.

The BAD: Lamentably, the acting by a minor character is very plastic and felt forced and out of place.

The ending could have, and SHOULD have been done SO much better than it was. Gauging by the content of the film, it was apparent that the filmmakers had it in them, so the fact that no one seems to have pushed for a better conclusion is sloppy, disappointing and would be completely unforgivable if the rest of the film had not had the compelling moments it did.

Well worth the watch, in the dark, with the sound cranked. Oscar nod for sound editing - my ****!!! Dont believe any hate...

LONG time since a movie invoked unbridled, white knuckle terror.

Solid 7.5/10 from this guy. Whew

Enjoyable horror that sets the tension from the start and then slowly builds on it. Well shot and solid acting. Nice subtle scares carry you along till the end. I don't understand why so many bad reviews, as I've said it's an enjoyable indie-horror.