IMDb RATING
4.6/10
2.7K
YOUR RATING
Father Gabriele Amorth performs his ninth exorcism on an Italian woman.Father Gabriele Amorth performs his ninth exorcism on an Italian woman.Father Gabriele Amorth performs his ninth exorcism on an Italian woman.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Jeffrey Lieberman
- Self - Chairman of Psychiatry, Columbia University
- (as Jeffrey A. Lieberman)
Michael First
- Self - Clinical Psychiatrist
- (as Michael B. First)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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".
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 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 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.
** (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 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
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
Did you know
- TriviaWilliam Friedkin interviewing Father Amorth found he was a fan of The Exorcist and asked him if he could witness an exorcism saying "I would have thought no. It's not an entertainment." To his amazement he said, "Let me think about it". He received a reply just days later inviting him to one.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Half in the Bag: 2018 Catch-Up (part 1 of 2) (2018)
- How long is The Devil and Father Amorth?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Languages
- Also known as
- Дьявол и отец Аморт
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $20,449
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $7,814
- Apr 22, 2018
- Gross worldwide
- $20,449
- Runtime
- 1h 8m(68 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1 / (high definition)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content