Devil Seed

Watching this film, I was constantly struck by the way the director inserted himself into the project with such a loud thud.

Playing camera and light tricks that seem designed only to showboat his technique, what is really revealed is an object lesson in the old phrase "Knowing just enough to get oneself in trouble." I can only hope that with the passage of time, the director/writer/editor/Svengali behind this wet splat comes to be humiliated by how amateurish he once was as he's grown into creating valid works.

Plotwise, NO new ground is covered here. Not a centimeter of fresh ideas, but a fairly sizable contribution to teen-boy gratification fantasies wherein pretty girls say the c-word and a bleach blonde gives generously to the public nipple fund and the heroine is ...naturally, a virgin. Completely gratuitous gazongas (In the shower, of course!) is a sign someone has lost focus. This film doesn't ever seem to have bothered so much as looking for its reading glasses.

To get performances this poor on film requires determination in casting, extraordinary bad-luck or a George Lucas level micro-managerial determination to suck any kind of reality out of the otherwise human-shaped beings verbalizing and mugging on the beleaguered screen. Add to that a series of times where you can literally speak the dialogue before the characters do, and you have a morbid product to foist upon people who could have otherwise put that hour and a half of their fleeting lives into anything and found it more worthwhile.

The question of why it was made has been tossed out in a few reviews and while it seems like a bit of a mystery, I don't think it is at all. The answer lies in the opening of this review. It was a vanity piece created by a would-be auteur without talent or technique enough to assemble a film worth watching. I just hope he's able to grow using this film as experience. Another film this bad and Ewe Boll is going to be hiring hit people to come after this guy for working his stretch of sidewalk.

Best recommendation is for 12 year-old boys who've never heard of horror films before. THAT would be a happy group. Anyone else is going to find themselves checking their phones during most of this digital face-palm.

One of the hardest, yet most popular horror genre's to get films made is of possession. Most of them are either silly or just rehashes of everything else that has come before it. The latest Devil Seed doesn't seem to have much new to offer, but those are sometimes the ones that step out of the shadows to surprise you.

Devil Seed follows a college student who moves in with girlfriends after the holidays. After having a few drinks out on the town and visit a psychic causing her to freak her friend out after having some sort of episode. With no memory of what happened, she slowly starts experience changes both sexual and violent leading her and everyone else to wonder what is inside her. At first this movie flows pretty well delivering an interesting take on the genre, but then slowly starts to fall somewhat apart. The story and performances seem to take a downward spiral into bad as if everyone lost track of what they were trying to do. There are some really well done possession moments that elevates the film and give you hope that it's back on track, but end just as quick as they begin. Luckily they keep returning to keep you interested just long enough for it to end. The real issue here is the sometimes over acting and other times played down performances that really do not keep a good feel of what these characters are trying to convey.

While this is in no way one of the worst films in this genre, it just didn't take advantage of the film it had. The story itself would have worked fine had they just thinned out the story a bit. Either way if you are a fan of the possession genre and trying to find one that will finally work for you, give Devil Seed a chance. Compared to most of those that hit the shelves on a weekly basis this one is way better.

http://www.examiner.com/movie-in-dallas/bobby-blakey

Well, this is a horror flick I have a few difficulties with. It all looked well done but the budget makes it sometimes laughable and the scariness goes away by that.

A lot of effects is 100% CGI and it shows that it was the cheap kind of CGI. And some CGI is seen but the next shot is isn't there anymore, just watch the all crackle, next shot the wall is in excellent shape. When Alex (Michelle Argyris) is possessed you can easily spot the make-up. But it's not all that bad. The acting was rather good. I would recommend it for teenagers, not that creepy and bloody but with a lot of girls walking around in their underwear. The flick starts off very hot with Bree (Vanessa Broze) having sex but you can see what you will get, she's fully naked but you only see her for behind getting her ride. She makes it good in a shower scene were she goes full frontal when the camera zooms out.

All clichés from possessed flicks are here to see, the changing of the voice and face. Even the spiderwalk is here just like in The Exorcist (1973), of course the original is still the best. It's low on gore and on red stuff, it do has it's good moments but overall it's sometimes a bit laughable due the effects.

Ideal for teenagers to watch but buffs and geeks must stay away from it before they get possessed.

Gore 0/5 Nudity 1/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

"The Devil In Me" (Not Devil Seed, more on that later) is a cliché ridden, hilarious mess, and the only way I can come to terms with it is by compiling one of my infamous lists. So, here goes...

1. Why is the victim of these atrocities always 'The new girl in town?'

2. Why is the only one doing nude scenes the bimbo with the boob job with a bit part?

3. Why would you break into a psychics for a 60 dollar reading after a heavy night out drinking?

4. Why is it the initial SHOCK when you hear a noise turns out to be nothing, but it always followed by the REAL SCARE?

5. Why bother possessing someone you're raping so she'll give birth to THE ANTICHRIST?

6. Why is it so convenient that the school councellor's father turns out to be A BLOOMIN' EXORCIST?!

7. Why can a demonic spirit in flight be stopped by A SHOWER CURTAIN?!

8. Why is this marketed as a horror when it should be a comedy? (18 you say?! BWHAHAHAHAHAHA etc)

9. Why bother changing the name of the film in the UK? (Might have been better if they'd changed the director, writer, actors, caterers...)

10. Why, in this genre, do the credits ALWAYS begin with an appalling loud cacophony of noise by a metal band you've never heard of?

I'm sure there are more, many more, but I'm off now to take some paracetamol and have a lie down. I've just got time for perhaps the most important question of them all: 11. Why was this ever made?! 4/10

I will put up with a lot to watch a horror.... it's hard to find a really good one and I understand, accept and even like that you have to watch a lot of B's, C's and D's to find one that might rate higher.

This one rates way, way lower.

If the main actor wheeze-breathed any more I think I would have to rip my ears off. She has 3 expressions - blank, concerned/worried/scared (they're all the same), and devil face.

The only redeeming feature about this film was the supporting actor, the brunette friend. The rest of the cast acted like they were in a school play and they'd had about 3 days to rehearse.

There were no real scares, no jolts, and certainly nothing unexpected. My friend and I were anticipating the dialogue and most of the time we got it right.... there are no new premises here! I really would rather have re-watched nearly any other movie than see this for the first time..... Give this one a big ol' miss.