A Possuida

After the release of The Exorcist in 1973, it was really only a matter of time before somebody realised that 'ex' sounds a bit like 'sex' and ended up coming up with a film called 'The Sexorcist'. Unfortunately that person was Mario Gariazzo; and while he may well have gone on to contribute to the script of the best Emanuelle film (Sister Emanuelle) and direct the seriously sleazy 1979 Giallo Play Motel - he apparently is not so well suited to ripping off The Exorcist, and The Sexorcist will surely go down as being one of the most pointless Exorcist rip offs of all time; and in a 'genre' that includes films such as Exorcismo and Naked Exorcism - that really is saying something! The trouble in this film starts with a strange wooden statue that is apparently Satan on a cross. It comes alive and a young theology student by the name of Danila ends up getting possessed by the devil. The Devil doesn't seem to have any particular plan in mind; he just gets the young girl masturbating and making sex offers to anyone who will listen...but hey, what else could you expect from a film that puts an 'S' in front of 'Exorcist'?

Actually, that's one of the film's main problems. It's the SEXorcist and there's very little sex to speak of! There's a ton of scenes involving vomiting, loads of religious gabble, scenes set in churches and even a priest being whipped with a chain - but where's the sex that the title promises? Naturally the plot is really very stupid and the director makes no secret of the fact that this film exists simply to cash in on The Exorcist. The Sexorcist is not without plus points, however. The film does feature a rather sleazy atmosphere and a lot of it is set in churches, which blends well. There's also a delicious cast which is headed by the pretty Stella Carnacina - and she gets back up from the likes of Ivan Rassimov (playing the very horny Devil, no less), Gabriele Tinti and Luigi Pistilli who ends up performing the sexorcism. I mean exorcism. The scenes in which the leading lady vomits and prances around 'possessed' are also worth watching. However, at the end of the day; The Sexorcist just doesn't live up its promise and what we end up with is just a really pointless Exorcist rip-off that isn't much worth bothering with.

Absolutely dreadful US title for this fine piece of Euro exploitation cinema, L'Ossessa. Directed by Mario Gariazzo who wrote or directed many such Italian movies including Play Motel, Sister Emanuelle and Vacanze per un Massacro, this is obviously an Exorcist rip-off but done with great panache. Stella Carnacina, as the possessed one, does not make a false move, as she rants, seduces, screams and spews throughout. She is on the screen most of the time and always looks menacing or appealing. There is much violence and sexual activity but also much background church activity that is most authentically portrayed and lends much power to the possession scenes. It is also these scenes of religious activity quietly (or not so quietly) being mocked that must upset a lot of people. In the US, apparently, the TV personality, Elvira, used to make much fun of the film and there are prints with her many intrusions. It is easy to see why because there do seem comic moments but it seems to me these come after one or another tremendous bout of energetic raving from young Stella and whilst they may have seemed appropriate in the original script, the way the possession scenes have been shot, they seem inadequate. When we have just watched the most astonishing and vigorous scenes of blasphemy, for the doctor or relative to reflect 'she seems a little worse' or 'I think it must be psychological' seem far from suitable and should have been ratcheted up when it was clear the activity was going to be so sensational. For those who think they may not enjoy this, they are probably right but for those who think they might - YOU WILL!

C'mon Satan, get the finger out. You started off okay with Beyond The Door and The Antichrist, then totally fumbled the ball with Magdalena possessed by the Devil. You're supposed to be trying to take the souls of the human race from that of God, so why are you settling on making teenagers randy foul-mouthed rebels? That's what they are anyway!

This one starts quite good, with art student Danila getting involved with restoring a very life-like figure on a cross that her university have purchased. Danila's got some domestic problems. Her father (Chris Avram) is drifting away from her mother (Lucretia Love), who is having an affair with hunky Gabrielle Tinti. Lucretia's a bit kinky too, so it doesn't help that Danila happens upon Gabrielle whipping the crap out of Lucretia with a bunch of roses, and Lucretia screaming for him to do it harder. Danila goes off to concentrate on her work, restoring some art back at college.

This is where perhaps the best scene of the film happens, as while Danila is working away on her project, the man on the cross behind her suddenly starts moving, comes to life as a Satanic Ivan Rassimov, and makes sweet sweet love to Danila on the floor of the studio while a weird wind blows about. Then again, shortly afterwards, Danila regains her senses fully clothed, restoring her painting. So what's going on? And what creepy bastard is following her around.

Of course Danila starts acting possessed and indulges in some furious self-abuse witnessed by her parents, so soon begins the jibber jabber about real illness versus possession and the whole film descends into boredom, save for a nightmare sequence where Danila enters a demonic ceremony and Ivan Rassimov (who makes a good Satan) nails her to a crosss. Sadly, after this bit, it's off to Exorcist-lite territory as Danila gets shipped off to a convent and priest Luigi Pistilli is brought in to sort her out in a very underwhelming finale.

This of course happens a lot in exploitation cinema, but it doesn't do us fans much good to track down a film and find it's a weaker version of the film it's trying to rip off. You could probably watch the first half and just switch it off, because up until then it's a fine film. Umberto Raho has a great moustache in this one, however.

L'OSSESSA, also known as THE TORMENTED or THE SEXORCIST, or the ridiculously titled THE EERIE MIDNIGHT HORROR SHOW, is a forgotten EXORCIST rip-off which contains one of the best horror moments I've ever seen. The scene is when the crucifix comes alive. This great spooky scene is unforgettable and totally effective (great FXs). It's a shame the rest of the movie doesn't maintain the level of creepiness exemplified during that scene.

This is one of the most frustrating movies ever. Imagine the producers deciding to to make an EXORCIST copy but while making it, they actually succeed in creating something truly original (a possessed sculpture of crucified man, which is shocking when you think about it) but then completely forgets their original idea in order to make a boring and uninspired EXORCIST rip-off. Had the film continued with the possessed sculpture concept (with the characters trying to destroy it, etc), this film would have rocked. But once the girl becomes possessed by the spirit of the sculpture, she never tells anyone from where the demon came from. She, and the script, completely forgets the haunted crucifix, which is STUPID!!!

If you like so-called "Euro-cult" movies, the first 45 minutes deliver unlike any other Euro-cult movies. But after the scene when the girl has a vision of being crucified and she gets stigmatas, the remaining 45 minutes SUCK. Boring. It goes nowhere fast as it tries to emulate (badly) THE EXORCIST. So, watch the first 45 minutes of L'OSSESSA and enjoy the 1970s fashions, the sleaze and the amazing statue-comes-alive-to-ravish-the-girl scene but after the first 45 minutes, press stop and eject, and might as well go clip your toenails.

Maybe it was because I grew up under power-lines, but I have a strange affection for all these foreign "Exorcist" rip-offs. Most of these movies, truth be told, really aren't any more stupid plot-wise than the original "Exorcist", but they lacked the budget, the talent, and the raw visceral power to make them effective horror movies and usually ended up being merely risible. Still, with a few exceptions (i.e. the Turkish "Seytan"), they weren't as blatantly unoriginal and imitative as many critics (who obviously never watched them on their own terms)have claimed. The Italians, for instance, managed to add a ridiculous sexploitation angle to the proceedings in films like "L'Anticristo", "Malabimba", and this one.

After watching her high society mama (the ubiquitously naked Lucretia Love) being whipped by flowers (yes, you read that right) and engaging in other perverse sex acts with her lover (Gabriel "husband of Laura Gemser" Tinti), a pretty young artist (Stella Carnacina)becomes upset and falls under the spell of of an Etruscan demon/Christ type statue she is helping to restore. The statue comes to life (as the creepy Ivan Rassimov),strips off her calico dress, and "possesses" her in more ways than one. The rest of the movie involves her cursing and attacking her mother, trying to seduce her father, and finally getting exorcised by no less than Luigi Pistilli. Oh yeah, she also vomits green goo, but only at the very end, almost as an afterthought.

By no means is this movie good, but it sure is entertaining!It makes no sense at all, but never slows down to allow you to contemplate its sheer absurdity. And what an exploitation cast! Lucretia Love, who looks to be in her mid-30's, is obviously not old enough to be the mother of the twenty-something Carnacina, but that's not the point, is it? And you also have male character actors like Tinti, Rassimov, and Pistilli all doing what they do best. "Malabimba" has more sex and Mariangelo Giordano, so it perhaps slightly edges this one out, but this is definitely my second favorite European "Exorcist"/sexploitation rip-off ever. Check it out.