उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

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 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!

Greetings again from the darkness. In 1971, William Friedkin directed one of my all-time favorite films, THE FRENCH CONNECTION. He won the Oscar for Best Director. But of course that's not the movie which entrenched him as a cinematic legend. Two years later he directed THE EXORCIST, a film that, 45 years later, still regularly appears at or near the top of most "Best Horror film" lists.

For most of his adult life (he's now in his 80's), Mr. Friedkin has been associated with exorcisms, and he kicks off this documentary by confessing that he will be attending his first ever actual exorcism ... and will be filming the ceremony. It's a ritual very few of us have ever witnessed, and we learn that more than 500,000 Italians seek exorcisms from a priest each year. The director seems very anxious to take us along on his journey.

We get interviews and footage from multiple associated folks: Jeffrey Burton Russell, author of "The Prince of Darkness" and other satanic novels; William Peter Blatty, author of "The Exorcist"; a young Los Angeles priest who simultaneously expresses skepticism while stating he wouldn't want to get that close to the devil; and a couple of Neurosurgeons and some Psychiatrists. There are also interviews with a brother and sister recalling her experience of having a liberating exorcism performed on her, and the titular Father Gabriele Amorth - one of the most beloved figures in the Catholic Church. He was Head Exorcist for the Diocese of Rome for more than 30 years.

Whether the movie works for you or not (whether you believe it's real) likely depends on the interview we neither see nor hear. Mr. Friedkin's build up is to the exorcism he attends as Father Amorth performs the 9th exorcism on 'Cristina'. It's May 1, 2016 and there are perhaps 12-15 people in the room, including Cristina's parents and boyfriend. She has struggled with "demonic possession" for years, and the footage is quite startling - especially the audio of the guttural voice from such an innocent looking lady. It's also Father Amorth's 91st birthday and he literally thumbs his nose at the devil. It's after this ceremony where Friedkin claims he was to interview Cristina in a local church. Inexplicably, he doesn't have his camera, so we only hear him tell of the horrific events.

Mr. Friedkin directs the film (co-written with noted film critic Mark Kermode) and also acts as our guide through the rituals and beliefs associated with exorcisms. There is a bit of a "Dateline" vibe to the production, though it's a bit surreal to hear Father Amorth proclaim to the evil spirits, "You are banned forever". As has been the tradition for years, religion and science are at odds with the subject. Neurosurgeons label it "delirium", while Psychiatrists call it "Disassociate Trance Disorder". Is it merely a placebo effect caused by religious beliefs, or does Satan exist? Perhaps author Jeffrey Burton Russell says it best: "stay away from this stuff".

The Devil and Father Amorth (2017)

** (out of 4)

For better or worse, THE EXORCIST will always be the film people think of whenever William Friedkin is discussed. I personally don't think it's his best film but there's no question that it was a ground-breaking motion picture that was the director's most successful at the box office. It's interesting to see that towards the end of his career he would revisit the subject of exorcisms but this time it's the true story of Father Amorth who let Friedkin film his ninth exorcism on a woman.

THE DEVIL AND FATHER AMORTH got released to mostly negative reviews with many calling into question the ethics of Friedkin because of a twist that happens towards the end of the picture. I'll get to that more in a minute but there's no doubt that this here is a rather questionable movie for the director to tackle and especially when you consider it's just 69-minutes, which makes it feel more like a Blu-ray extra instead of an actual feature. In fact, Friedkin hasn't taken too kindly to the negative press this film has gotten and has really lashed out at critics.

Well, I'm sorry to say it but I have to agree with the negativity surrounding this picture. The first ten or so minutes basically has Friedkin talking about THE EXORCIST including revisiting the locations where it was filmed. He talks about the case that the movie was based on and then we get some archival footage of William Peter Blatty discussing the original case and the film. Umm... okay. I'm really not sure why we needed this stuff unless it was some sort of attempt to bring more attention to this movie. Perhaps the running time wasn't long enough so this was added?

Whatever the case is, none of this early footage is of much interest but then we jump to the exorcism that is being performed. We hear from the woman's family as well as Father Amorth who talks about exorcisms and various ones that he has performed. Once we get to the exorcism the main thing that's going to jump out is the voice coming from the woman. Some have question whether it's a sound effect or not but I really don't know. Are these scenes scary? Not at all.

What follows is Friedkin talking to a various of doctors and showing them the footage. There's a debate on whether it is some sort of brain issue yet we never really get any test results from the woman herself. The back and forth debate on the religious issue to the medical one is rather interesting but then we get back to the controversial ending. I'm not going to spoil it for people but I must admit that I found it to be incredibly stupid and I didn't buy it at all. It's like one of those monster hunter television shows where nothing ever happens until the moment a camera isn't set up.

THE DEVIL AND FATHER AMORTH is a film that I was really looking forward to but it's a real shame that it turned out the way it did.

The voice effect is literally the same one used for the zombies mode in Call Of Duty. How exactly did they expect anyone to think this is authentic? This is not a documentary, it is a blatant lie.

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.

I like how it was documentary style. I also liked that they showed both sides of the argument. Her voice when she was possessed sounded like the nazi zombies from call of duty. The ending was a bit ridiculous

What a fraud. This is the worst thing I've ever seen. It's badly done. All based in a poor voice effect. Only Ignorant people would say this is real.

First I have to say that I am not a religious person, so this doesn't come from that point of view.

I struggle to understand why so many bad reviews for this documentary.

The Devil and Father Amorth is an amazing documentary that delves into exorcisms still performed to this day by Vatican appointed Exorcists.

William Friedkin is fantastic in this documentary as he explores exorcisms and what made him famous via directing the greatest devil possession film of all time The Exorcist.

This documentary is genuinely disturbing and it does have you questioning is there something more out there and maybe I should visit church.

It is creepy, intriguing and had me on the edge of my seat all the way through.

I would highly recommend this film. I am sure with the coming release of The Pope's Exorcist staring Russell Crowe and based on some of Father Amorth's files, This documentary will get more viewing time and perhaps get the respect it deserves.

You don't have to believe. I personally don't believe in Satan. However, this film made me question and if it can do that, then its a good film.

The film is kind of informative from the point of view of specialists and priests.

I used to believe in things like this but after watching this "joke-umentary" I can't say that I do. I put up more of a fight at the age of 5 when the nurses tried to give me a shot to knock me out for surgery and I am sure the language and grunts coming out of my mouth were a lot scarier than this womans. If she was possessed then why didn't she head but Father Amorth and bite those holding her down. She was compared to a caged animal? Try this tactic with a monkey. William you should be ashamed for putting this thing together. I love how you were only allowed to use your camera yet there was one in the room showing you filming it. Wasn't it convenient that you didn't have it at the end? You must have learned that trick from the Bigfooters. I also love all the extra people in the room after stating that the devil (demon) sometimes transfers to the next person, If it was a true demon no exorcist would allow that many people in the same room during the exorcism in the fear of containment. This is the worst documentary that I have ever seen.

That´s the best thing that I have to say about this sad attempt of documentary. And being a lover of William Friedkin´s movies, ( Cruising, To Live and Die in L.A, The French Connection, 12 Angry Men and The Exorcist, of course), I just don´t get how he could fall so low to make this. The "exorcism" shown here looks so fake. Really disappointed. I really hope this is not his last work. I give this a 1.

This documentary looked promising, and although I am not religious myself I like to keep an open mind about these things. So let's put my opinion about religion aside.

I liked that he asked people's opinions and it wasn't just shut down by everyone, it seems everyone had a really open mind and was willing to really think about all the possible causes.

That being said, everything else was a flop. The director interrupts everyone all the time, what is the point in asking someone a question if you're not going to let them answer it?!

Also, they're saying the possessed woman would have an impossible strength but she is easily held down by 2 men (and one of them isnt even trying).

I didn't even finish it..

This documentary is an interesting insight into the most prominent exorcist in Rome, and Italy.

It shows the reality of exorcisms and the process - which is different to portrayals in feature films.

There are also interesting perspectives from medical science on the phenomenon.

Your don't have to believe in anything to find this documentary interesting.

Worth a watch if you are in the mood for some education and a wider perspective on the world

Only 20 minutes into this "documentary" and let me say... what a giant load of donkey doo doo.

Using some kind of "demon" voice that should only be used by Hollywood for the average run of the mill horror film.

Seriously people, don't waste your precious time on this piece of garbage. It will make you cringe so badly.

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.

Easy to spot some of the from some of the 'possessed' critics on this page bagging this doco, giving it a low score for no point at all but belligerence.

According to William Friedkin, however, his brief, mostly straightforward documentary includes just such a novelty: the first authorized footage of a Catholic exorcism.

That claim will serve as a selling point for some, a red flag for others. Safe to say, this is unsettling fare ill-suited to the very young or the faint of heart.

He also includes an incomplete portrait of Father Amorth that asserts but does not explore the priest's sanctity. This will be a source of disappointment for Catholics in the audience since the jaunty, compassionate clergyman -- whose sense of humor extended to constant mockery of the Evil One -- appears to warrant a more penetrating study of his personality and work.

More attention devoted to Father Amorth, moreover, would have helped to offset the inevitable grimness of the rite at the heart of the proceedings.

Why is it that anytime a movie made up of religious content (especially the Christian kind) does one suddenly see an onslaught of 1s and 10s? Clearly people are reviewing with their emotions and their beliefs, rather than rationally weighing the merits and faults of a film.

I confess I have read a number of books on possession, as well as found every raw footage of authentic cases I can find on Youtube. So I was eager to see this when I heard of it. What I like about it is that it's a real case rather than actors. The behavior of the demonic possessed woman was very consistent with everything I've read. Especially the sudden on and off quality of her states. After screaming bloody murder for 10 minutes we would suddenly see sweet and normal Cristina again. Likewise, contrary to the Excorcist, the demonically possessed try their best to live normal lives trying to go to school and hold down jobs, and can appear perfectly normal much of the time. Additionally, some take years with many more than 9 exorcism before they are completely delivered, so 9 exorcisms didn't surprise me. Nor would it Fr. Amorth.

I also liked having the chance to see the famed Fr. Amorth actually in action.

I also largely liked the interviews following the exorcism, as well as the scenes of Fr. Amorth spontaneously relating to the faithful.

My great disappointment was the obvious effects added to Cristina's voice when she screamed. WHY? Mr. Friedkin, this is supposed to be authentic. Editing in Hollywood effects only gave ammunition to doubters to attack it, and cast doubt in the minds on the fence. This is a documentary, not The Exorcist. Forgive the irony, but I believe you succumbed to temptation. That element did nothing but cheapen the movie.

All in all, however, I think Friedkin did a nice job, and I would recommend it.

Friedkin does try his best to make this somewhat credible, I'm not religious in the slightest but went into this with an open mind.

The build up was fun, hearing these accounts from Christina's family about the horrific things that had happened, oh boy, I'm very interested in when we get to the 'real' exorcism, then we find out this is Christina's 9th lap around the holy field and at that point is where any optimism left me, this is simply religious propaganda. Go to mass and holy ceremonies because this is how you'll get the devil anGerY, then you'll know you're possessed.

The 'fact' that Christina has been exorcised 8 times prior to this recording is just an easy way to dismiss the far more extreme symptoms she allegedly had in the previous exorcisms; which leads me to the damn voice. The. Damn. Voice. It's just post production magic, synthesising the voice, and its blindingly obvious, take a listen back at it and notice how every time Christina's demonic voice is projected, the room goes silent and even when Amorth is speaking, his voice disappears, but his mouth keeps going. I have a lot of respect for Friedkin and his contribution to modern film, but he was in over his head here, couldn't even isolate a track in order to keep background noise over the voice.

The documentary is a sham, watch for a few laughs.