O Diabo e o Padre Amorth

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".

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!

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.

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.

The recorded exorcism itself is very interesting, yet also kind of boring. I liked hearing interpretations of the psychiatrists and neuroscientists and the archbishop. The priest himself and the "possessed" woman's family members (as well as the other interview subjects who said they'd previously been possessed and freed) were less reliable sources since they had so much emotional investment, religious fervor and fear, and strict viewpoints that it didn't really leave anything open for discussion. The movie opens with the stat that 500,000 Italians a year seek out exorcism. That's a lot of people who believe they have the devil inside them, but it's also worth noting that about 75% of the country is Catholic. In other words, an exceptionally religious country is also exceptionally "possessed" ... or it might be more accurate to say that they are afraid they are possessed and more likely seek out spiritual solutions for their problems.

For the end sequence, the director resorted to a recap of a final event using creepy narration, "scary" stock footage, dark music, and stingers to try to create a scary scene, but the whole time I was just wondering why he didn't record it (since that's the whole reason he was there) while also feeling like I couldn't really take his word after watching the footage of the actual exorcism and it being nothing like this final "terrifying" event he later describes but doesn't let us view.

Bottom line. The "possessed" woman was definitely in distress, but the unanswered question is: What is the root of her distress and what is the solution? Very interesting topic, okay execution. How you feel about it will partially depend on how you feel about possession going into it.