Il signor Diavolo

I read the plot and I was so interesting in seeing that one. When I ended the movie I realized that it was not a Horror movie at all. It is just a Supernatural-or kind of-Mystery movie.

Again at the beginning it is very interesting but towards the hour of movie it becomes boring and boring; not knowing exactly what is happening it is not a good thing. They do not provide clues about what we are seeing.

The movie seems to be a long flashback and the investigation of the events. The end is kind of good, but that is all. If you are getting boring and want to stop watching, you must see the the very end.

Superficial and discounted. Terrible acting, elementary history and meaning none. As a mysterious film there is no tension, as a horror film there is no terror. Alessandro Haber and Andrea Roncato make small cameos: Haber is fine but does not shine as usual; Roncato, compared to the protagonists, looks like an Oscar-winning actor. In a peasant context, in 1952, they still go around with oil lamps (ok), but they also have many vans and cars, even the father of the little protagonist. Completely unreal: they were very poor, at most they could afford a cart pulled by a mule. I am Italian and I know well the situation of the villages of those years, even a bicycle was considered expensive (see "Bicycle Thieves" by Vittorio De Sica, 1948). Luckily I didn't go to see it at the cinema: after 5 minutes I would have gone away cursing and asking for a refund. Garbage.

Great style and atmosphere, but disappointing ending. This is a recurring theme in Pupi Avati's work. This film is reminiscent of Arcane Sorcerer (1996) in which a protagonist goes to investigate strange happenings involving evil forces. There are similar castle/cathedral-like sets/locations. They both have underwhelming/disappointing endings.

Where Il Signor Diavolo really shines is the atmosphere and the look of the film. It has a gorgeous and gritty feel. It felt authentic. The acting was good all around. The subtitles were poor on the version I saw so that may be part of the problem.

However, the other part of the problem is the structure. This is a novel that was turned into a film about a man who spends half the film sitting down and reading a transcript of an interview that authorities conducted with a young boy who told them a story about why he killed a another boy he thought was the devil. Then, our protagonist has a series of conversations which lead into a rushed finale.

It's creepy. It's wonderful to look at. But it doesn't go anywhere interesting.

This movie follows perfectly the style of other Pupi Avati's movies. It's a good gothic horror, characterized by a disturbing atmosphere pervaded by a sick and almost surreal sacredness.

In this movie, it's just the beginning part that's scary. For the rest the plot is ridiculous, the special effects are ridiculous and even the aura of the film that should be scary is ridiculous.