L'altra faccia del diavolo

I managed similar cases for 9 years and I see chilling similarities to our cases; Sclera (no pupils), flying across the room, levitation, visions, hair pulling, slapping and personal invasions. Demonic infestations, manifestations and injuries are common. There is no science to the invasions. Science is only used in attempt to explain away medical causes while monitoring the victims health. These instances are slim (less than 1% receive this benefit). Remember, demonic possession doesn't exist, yet it does according to psychological diagnosis codes, Yet, if medical professionals have no choice but to use it, then the victim is usually hospitalized due to incompetence. It's easier to dismiss it was a psychological issue, however that only becomes true when the problem is ignored or goes on unaddressed. Demons, diabolical entities and even Satan that can inhibit a host (Christian or not). This film should ring as a warning to everyone that its not all or just entertainment. I personally think that Hollywood should embrace this film as a near reality, believe it or not and that my friends is truly frightening.

The answer to the title question is most likely this near repugnant cash in on a horror sub-genre that is being milked for all its worth. As always with horror as a genre, even the most unimaginative movie will find staunch supporters, such is the case with this here picture from William Brent Bell. That's not to sarcastically put down those who enjoy it, for without doubt some do find any form of demonic possession in movies as being terrifying, but in a movie that runs at under 80 minutes, there's under ten minutes of unease, chills or possession based terror. Yes a couple of scenes hold the tingle on the spine, and true enough to say that Suzan Crowley as Maria Rossi acts superbly, but what about the rest of it? The structure and formula is tired, there's no attempt to spin something new into the demonic possession market, while the ending is undoubtedly as bad a cop-out as you may have heard it is.

Cribbing from any number of movies that are far better, devoid of a sense of build up and sustaining of atmosphere, it is what it is. A lazy cash cow aimed at a small niche in the horror fan universe who find the thematics reason enough to get involved with it. My honest advice is to just watch the trailer instead and skip the movie. 4/10

The Devil Inside directed by William Brent Bell is one of the worst horror movies I have ever seen.The movie is also a waste of money since it does not scare you at all.The movie has just a scene or two that scares you.While the rest of the movie runs like a television-drama.The movie is shot in a documentary style.The movie's climax is very bad,thus it is one of the worst climax ever.

Story:- In Italy, a woman Isabella Rossi(Fernanda Andrade) becomes involved in a series of unauthorized exorcisms during her mission to discover what happened to her mother Maria Rossi(Susan Crowley), who allegedly murdered three people during her own exorcism.

The sole reason I am giving it two is,one point for the good story and another one for the performance of Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley.

The direction is bad.

The screenplay is bad too.

Performances:- Fernanda Andrade and Susan Crowley are good.Even Helmuth and Simon Quarterman are okay.

All in all,The Devil Inside is bad horror movie more so because of its abrupt ending and lack of scares in addition to that.

Before saying anything, let me point out I watch all films with an open mind, and normally I can enjoy a film regardless of how technically poor it is.

This however, was a farce. I honestly can't believe this film got released into theatres, scene after scene was a regurgitation of scenes that we've all seen before. Not just individual scenes, but the whole tone of the film was so familiar and dull.

I didn't take count, but after a noticeable amount of times of the date being shot at me with a low dong was laughable, the bloke who made it must've watched paranormal activity and thought "ooh that was good, I'll have that... then I'll grossly over use it" There was nothing new about any of the exorcism scenes, apart from it was with a hand held camera.. wow. just watch the exorcist and shake the TV around.

I felt like i was watching an awful, pretentious student film from the outset and most of the acting had me cringing in my seat. I literally have never seen a worse all round acting display in my life... it was just totally unacceptable. They were trying so hard to make it look 'real' or 'genuine' and it just looked pathetic, so many face head scratching and little smirks to themselves.

I won't go into the ending... but it summed the movie up really. unoriginal, contrived and no shock factor (which was obviously intended) you know when a film is so bad its kind of entertaining? well this is just offensive. It was shameful. I can't think of one redeeming quality.

DO NOT SPEND MONEY ON THIS FILM

Exorcism of Emily Rose tops this movie.... And that's not saying a whole lot. The plot was good, the acting....par but you saw everything coming. The ending was I call a "ran out of money" ending. Definitely worth waiting for the DVD release. I didn't mind the whole Blair witch/paranormal activity/cloverfield camera action they used. It was just the fact you knew what was coming 1 step ahead. Not to leave out the very dull ending but I guess it would have cost too much $ to actually leave us paying folk to know what happened to the people we spent the last 87 minutes caring about. Overall had a few creepy parts. Dog barking made my body ache. Just don't waste your time and money running to the theater to see this one.