The Ritual

The film is about satanic rituals. We can say it's based on cliché themes. A young girl gets possessed by a demon. There are two priests in the film. These priests try to save the girl from this situation by performing satanic rituals. And the whole film goes on like this... From a technical point of view, the first thing that caught my attention was the camera movements. There were a lot of unnecessary camera moves. I guess the camera was constantly moved to add some action. Even in a random scene, the camera moves in a strange way, it shakes. We saw unnecessary zooms. This was disturbing.

Let's move on to the second point. The script was a total fiasco. Maybe the story could have been expanded, the background of the female character could have been explored. The script felt very incomplete, and the events were presented to the audience in a very narrow way. There's almost no depth in the screenplay.

The theme of suspense was kept in the foreground, while horror was pushed to the background. They say it's based on true events. Maybe that's why they avoided exaggeration, I don't know. This looks like a horror movie, but it's not. Actually, it's not even suspense. It creates tension in a few moments but doesn't lead to anything. It's not what you expect. For me, it was a disappointment...

In 1928-based true-tale "The Ritual" priests Dan Stevens & Al Pacino (supported by nuns like Patricia Heaton & Ashley Greene) perform a three-week+ exorcism on Abigail Cowen (excellent). That exorcism though is basically just a repetition of rituals with similar outcomes (including everyone but Pacino getting deeply disturbed (and often injured)) and there's no real exploration of whether Cowen is actually mentally ill rather than possessed (it's mentioned - but dismissively). With solid performances and stylish direction (from writer David Midell) it is superior to most recent exorcist flicks (like the abysmal "The Pope's Exorcist")... but it still ain't too good.

There is absolutely nothing interesting about this movie. There is the setup and then everything after that is just the same old same old growling voice theatrics of every other exorcism movie since the exorcism movie to start the whole exorcism movie craze, William Peter Blatty and William Friedkin's The Exorcist.

Now, this movie on the other hand was run through a highly technical process called "tension extraction" to remove any trace of dramatic variance. It's just dull. All the characters are one dimensional.

The plot is threadbare if not simply cut and paste. No, truly.

Someone pitched it this way: "Think The Exorcist but involving a young woman being helped by an old priest with an accent and a young priest with doubts." And someone else said, "So.....The Exorcist." And the first person said, "No one remembers that. We'll throw in the mom from Everybody Loves Raymond. They'll remember her. And we'll call it The Ritual." And the second person says, "But there was a really good folk horror movie just a few years ago called that." And the first person says "Perfect. People will have forgotten what that was about and think this is the latest quick reboot and hand over their money like the dolts they are. Get me the oldest actor on the planet to play the one priest. Is the guy from Cruising still alive?"

And within the next four minutes a script was finished by a malfunctioning AI, Pacino's agent told the studio where to park the truckload of money, and the film wrapped production so fast Roger Corman's corpse tripped a California seismograph rolling so hard over in his grave.

This piece of garbage movie is everything that is wrong with everything in the world. There is no thought put into anything anymore. It is all about rushing out rehashed tripe to take cash from the masses.

Here we are again-another film about demonic possession, another "based on a true story" tagline, another exorcism. But The Ritual, which dramatizes the infamous 1928 exorcism of Emma Schmidt, had something more in its grasp: a chilling historical case, a legendary priest, and the potential to stand out in a saturated subgenre. Unfortunately, while the bones of a compelling and terrifying film are here, the execution undercuts itself at nearly every turn.

The source material is potent. The real-life exorcism of Emma Schmidt is one of the most detailed and disturbing accounts in American history. But while the story had me hooked, the mockumentary-style camerawork took me right out of it. It's a baffling creative choice that feels like it belongs in an entirely different film. We're not watching a found-footage horror film here, but the cinematography seems to think we are. Jarring close-ups, erratic shaky cam, and a lack of visual clarity not only disrupt the pacing, they often hide the horror instead of revealing it.

Pacino, even in his late career, still commands the screen. His Father Riesinger is a worn man with a quiet intensity, bringing grit to the role. Dan Stevens matches his performance, injecting skepticism and emotional weight into a character. Abigail Cowen gives a physically demanding and emotionally performance as Emma. She doesn't overplay the possession, instead grounding it in fear, confusion, and exhaustion. Her portrayal makes you believe she's both victim and battlefield.

The Ritual isn't without merit. The performances are strong, the story is there, and there are moments that hint at something deeper and more terrifying. But the disjointed visual style does it no favors. It's a film that constantly reminded me of what it could have been something chilling, thought provoking, and unforgettable. Instead, it's a promising exorcism tale that exorcises itself of its own potential.

Many of the negative reviews have clearly missed the point of this movie. It's subtextual goal was not to instill fear, but to showcase a reality--the reality of the spiritual world and the warfare thereof. Sure, there are cinematic embellishments, and indeed, the shaky camera style was NOT the move for this type of movie. I believe a majority of still shots would've given this movie more grounding, focus, and realism.

HOWEVER, the message is genuine, and real. I think what people disliked so much was how the movie portrayed genuine people of faith, both weak and strong, acting in this scenario. The prayers, the passion, the fear, the confusion, the sin, the repentance, and the love was all there. It wasn't overdone, or corny, but transparent.

This movie merely attempts to showcase both the reality of evil and the reality of the Church's fight against it, to include the Church's imperfections in her members.

Exorcisms, or any extraordinary demonic activity in real life does not have the dramatic lighting, or the shaky camera, or the acting. And the faithful of the Church fight that evil foremost with faith, hope, love, and prayer. This movie is about that.

It's not meant to be a new and novel installment in the horror genre. It's meant to convey a reality that stays true to how Emma's ACTUAL exorcism went and those involved as attested to by Father Joseph Stieger.

I think people disliked this movie so much not because of its questionable camera work, but because it's about true faith. It actually exposes the nonglamorous and disparaging nature of a human being who's succumbed and enraptured by the diabolical. It's not cool, it's not pretty, it's not a spectacle, it's a human soul being tormented who's in need of compassion and love, and of course the prayers of the Church, to deliver them.

This movie dared an attempt at being theologically sound regarding demonology and spiritual warfare, and that's not what the masses want. They want a contrived fantastical story full of shock, adrenaline, and spookiness, but not reality.

So, sorry this account of genuine Christian faith in the light of evil didn't tickle your horror itch, but perhaps it could enlighten in you some sort of sense to the reality of primary evil, and therefore the realization of the Light which overcomes it.