Heredero del diablo

First of all, I am a big fan of the found footage supernatural/horror genre and love watching even the lesser acclaimed films. I am the type of viewer that draws the positives out of a very flawed film and enjoy it. So I expected to enjoy something out of this at the very least.

My god, what a tediously insufferable film this turned out to be.

There is absolutely no innovation or any attempt to try something new. It is so painfully boring.

The concept idea was very promising which is basically a found footage rendition of The Omen or Rosemary's baby. However, this film is so dire at engaging the audience due to the most irritable protagonist I have ever seen so far in a found footage type movie. For more than half of the movie, we are tortured with the sickly saccharine antics of a doting husband on his newly wed wife. There is no natural humour to ease the torment and worse for a film of this type, there were actually no scares until the last act.

As I said, I am the type of film goer that draws the positives and try enjoy that. So are there any? Well, there is a dog that was amusing for 2 seconds but even he looked bored, thereafter. OK, there is a bit more positives. You do get a predictable climax in an attempt to "reward " us for our eternal patience which was efficiently executed but without any unique vision or flair, just the usual creep around corridors and..."boo" oh it was just the dog sort of thing. The actors do perform well but the material they have to work with is revolting.

At the end of the credits there is a piece of text explaining that this film created 200,000 jobs. Well that was nice to know and the only bit that made me feel good knowing that at least it gave a lot of people work but then I wonder if stating that was an indirect apology and their justification to make this dreadfully boring movie?

TO be fair, the film is as polished as it can be for a found footage genre but its all pointless if it fails to engage us in the narrative.

If you haven't seen many horror films or supernatural films such as Paranormal Activity etc, then perhaps you might enjoy this more as long as you can stomach the vomit inducing newly weds for half of the movie.

I give this a 3/10 rating, mostly for the dog that looked fairly convincing in not wanting to be in the movie. Get a new agent doggy, you deserve better.

This is a Rosemarys baby knock off, with some deviation from the basic "Devil gets a woman pregnant" story. It gets off to an extremely slow start, and doesn't really get interesting until roughly the middle. There are some effective scares and visual effects, but the story starts to get bogged down, and then gets buried by the horror scenes. These are horrific and bloody enough, but I wished they stayed more with the characters.

The actors were pretty good and did ok with what they were given to work with. Perhaps better directing would have helped. This movie might be worth a watch if you can't find anything better. The moral of the story is get out of the taxi if the driver offers to take you to a fun place.

Samantha and Zach get married. For their honeymoon, they went to visit the Dominican Republic. One night there, they were brought by their taxi driver to a mysterious place where they get drunk and drugged. Nevertheless, they still managed to get back home safe and sound.

Not long after, Samantha finds out she was with child. From there, the further along the pregnancy Samantha got, the more bizarre and more violent behavior she would display. As she nears her due date, can Zach still do anything to avert the diabolical fate that seems to await his wife and baby?

Like many current horror films, "Devil's Due" is told through camera footage. Aside from the cameras Zach and characters carried around, there was also footage from security cameras. The first thirty minutes were practically just needless wedding coverage.

When it got around to telling the story, the pace was also quite slow. Mundane daily events like going to the supermarket or the obstetrician were punctuated by some disgusting or violent scenes which would have been a big deal had it happened in real life. Here, they happened, but there seemed to have been no consequences that follow their occurrence.

The best moments of this film were those scenes showing Samantha's repulsive eating habits, her super-telekinetic powers, and her effect on Catholic priests. The rest of the film was unfortunately forgettable, all the way up to the predictable climax. 3/10.

This was really deceptive marketing and hype that drew me into this movie. I am very sorry I went. The acting, directing, production design, continuity, editing and of course the story, screen writing and execution were just abysmal. There was nothing of quality in this film. The characters were stupid, the camera work was jarring "handheld reality TV" nonsense and on top of it all, the plot was told in a far superior manner by Roman Polanski in "Rosemary's Baby" forty years ago! It just shows that with some production money, a digital camera and some reality-TV "Blair Witch"/"Paranormal Activity"-type marketing approach, you can sell any kind of garbage to the American public. I urge you not to support this film, or any future endeavours of anyone involved with this project (cast, crew, director or screenwriters)....

'DEVIL'S DUE': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Another low-budget supernatural horror 'found footage' flick. The story is about a recently wed woman who unexpectedly becomes pregnant, with the Antichrist. It's an homage to the classic Roman Polanski thriller 'ROSEMARY'S BABY' but it's presented in a style that's a lot more similar to the 'PARANORMAL ACTIVITY' franchise. It was written by Lindsay Devlin (who's only other film writing credit is the 2013 documentary 'IN SO MANY WORDS') and directed by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett. Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett are part of a collective filmmakers group called 'Radio Silence'; they previously co-directed, co-wrote and co-starred in a segment of the 2012 'found footage' horror anthology 'V/H/S'. I think the filmmaking duo did an exceptional job on this (their debut feature film) and found it to be much better than a lot of critics (and 'found footage' movie haters) have made it out to be.

The story revolves around a newly wed couple, named Samantha and Zach McCall (played by Allison Miller and Zach Gilford), that go on their honeymoon in the Dominican Republic. After Samantha gets a weird reading from a fortune teller the two are led to a remote bar (outside the city) by a persistent cab driver (Roger Payano). They both get wasted (on shots) and pass out. It then appears that Samantha is taken to a room, beneath the club, where some kind of ritual is performed on her. When they return home they find out she's pregnant, despite the fact that Samantha has always regularly taken her birth control pills. The two decide to keep the child and then things really get strange. It's of course all caught on video and compiled (from many different sources) for the viewer.

The film (like I said) got mostly bad reviews from critics and horror fans (that hate the 'found footage' genre). It did get a few good reviews (though) from some scary movie aficionados (like director Eli Roth and the popular horror website 'Bloody Disgusting'). I enjoyed the movie; I love the horror genre and like 'found footage' flicks, when they're done right. I think this one was done right; it's scary, funny and just a lot of fun to watch. The rookie directors did a great job and the script is smart and clever as well. The two leads were also adequate enough (for a film like this); the lead woman is very beautiful too and the lead guy reminds me a lot of a political radio and internet talk show host (I watch) named David Pakman. It's just an all around good fright flick, especially if you like the genre. Ignore the haters!

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKhLjf_1MKw