The Devil and Father Amorth

It's interesting to see people giving this a one star rating based on their own personal belief. It's really nice if you're an atheist or Christian but setting that aside it's a competent documentary. Seemed pretty open minded to me. Friedkin's stand point seemed to be he felt there was something to it but wasn't 100% convinced. The music was a bit intrusive and framing during a couple of his monologues seemed careless. I don't know or care if extra processing was done on her voice. Other than those things it was interesting and helmed by an intelligent, rational guy. Giving it a 1 or even a 10 seems like a personal issue with the religious aspect rather than standing back and viewing objectively.

This will not be popular amongst the religious but... I'm very sceptical when it comes to Satan and demons. Why? Why would Satan possess random Italian lady? A demon maybe, but Satan? No. I'm sure he has better things to do.

I hear the argument from religious people that it is to destroy a person's faith, or to steal their souls, but if you look at it logically, how many are lost to possession? Wouldn't it only increase a person's faith in God and religion, exorcisms always seem to be successful, excluding the odd one or two horror stories. The only thing it benefits is religion, and a person's faith in their God.

I honestly believe that if Satan existed, he would have a far bigger agenda, like control over a population, making people commit atrocities in his name, he would cause division, hate, encourage discrimination, he would control people through fear of sinning, and threats of eternal torture... Oh wait, that sounds like... RELIGION!

The recorded exorcism itself is very interesting, yet also kind of boring. I liked hearing interpretations of the psychiatrists and neuroscientists and the archbishop. The priest himself and the "possessed" woman's family members (as well as the other interview subjects who said they'd previously been possessed and freed) were less reliable sources since they had so much emotional investment, religious fervor and fear, and strict viewpoints that it didn't really leave anything open for discussion. The movie opens with the stat that 500,000 Italians a year seek out exorcism. That's a lot of people who believe they have the devil inside them, but it's also worth noting that about 75% of the country is Catholic. In other words, an exceptionally religious country is also exceptionally "possessed" ... or it might be more accurate to say that they are afraid they are possessed and more likely seek out spiritual solutions for their problems.

For the end sequence, the director resorted to a recap of a final event using creepy narration, "scary" stock footage, dark music, and stingers to try to create a scary scene, but the whole time I was just wondering why he didn't record it (since that's the whole reason he was there) while also feeling like I couldn't really take his word after watching the footage of the actual exorcism and it being nothing like this final "terrifying" event he later describes but doesn't let us view.

Bottom line. The "possessed" woman was definitely in distress, but the unanswered question is: What is the root of her distress and what is the solution? Very interesting topic, okay execution. How you feel about it will partially depend on how you feel about possession going into it.

The Exorcist is still considered (rightfully) as one of the best horror movies of all time. This documentary goes beyond that, with the original director giving us some insights. Where the story originated, original shooting location, chracters versus their real life inspired ... humans/demons.

All that is well and good, but unfortunately even with a short running time, it does feel long at times. Especially during the "real" exorcism. It's nice to get a behind the scenes look, but it doesn't add anything to the discussion really. Although I can see that some may feel it has more weight, because it is "real". Why do I use "" when I write real? Because even the documentary, tries to pick it apart, with experts (doctors) and priests talking about it.

And even their arguments and their insight is nothing really new, at least not that much new things. I like Friedkin, he is a great director, so he does get the most of certain situations (though his insistance on asking the same question over and over again to a priest, about his spiritual "power" does feel a bit long and annoying), overall the documentary could have been shorter though. I do hope he makes more feature films - they tend to be really great

This was an interesting, but disappointing film. The various interviews were informative. The main draw was obviously the exorcism. It was so not scary. It was ridiculous. The voice was clearly manipulated in post production. It was the same voice effect used in dozens of movies. It's probably labeled "Devil Voice #3" in the drop down list of audio filters in their editing software. You need only look at the reactions of the numerous family members in the room. As the harsh demonic voice screams at the priest, they are not startled in the least. They calmly look on, smiling and nodding like they're gathered around the table for Sunday dinner. No fear, no drama... Just silliness.