THE OMEN meets THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE.THE OMEN meets THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE.THE OMEN meets THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE.
Photos
- Directors
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
1st watched 5/27/2007 - 6 out of 10(Dir-Ethan Wiley): Better than expected exorcism movie based on an actual event. In this movie, the demon doesn't just stay in the one body but tries to influence the entire ranch in an area called Blackwater Valley. The possessed girl named Isabella begins the movie being found in the woods devouring a live rabbit. Her response as to why it happens is a meek "he made her do it"(referring, of course, to the demon inside her). Initially the family doesn't know what's happening to her and wants to deny anything supernatural but their little girl is rapidly becoming something other than the person they know. Throughout the movie, little bits and pieces of the family's mixed-up life is revealed which is definitely unique for this type of movie. It's obvious that the demon wants to possess more than just the girl but also ruin the entire family and does this by revealing different episodes in their soap opera life to make them feel guilty about their past. The priest brought in to perform the exorcism is far from being an outside observer. He is a former lover of one of the daughters and has obviously been involved in the family's affairs for awhile. This gives the demon more fuel for it's fire(so to speak), but also gives the priest a greater reason to cure the girl. The ending of the movie was pretty disappointing, but the rest of the movie was actually a refreshing spin on this type of movie where the demon starts getting into everyone's heads -- making them do things that they wouldn't normally do. I also like the fact that they kind of showed you how the Catholics actually do the exorcisms and didn't skimp on the specifics. They also didn't throw in a lot of extra over-the-top gore or silliness that would make the story unbelievable. This movie was obviously made with less of a budget than other movies of this kind but they handled the story very well and made this actual event appear somewhat possible -- for this I commend the filmmakers and deem this a worthwhile movie.
I have to agree with the previous reviewer. Although the Kristin Erikson did a great job of playing the possessed girl, I seriously don't think that Isabelle, the character she was playing, was possessed. I have seen people have psychotic breaks due to sexual abuse, and they never made it clear whether or not the father had actually abused her or not. I also had to watch some parts of it over again, to make it clear as to what the letter said, what the characters' names were, and I'm still not clear on a few things that happened, whether they were real or not. I'm trying to find the "original" story that it was based on, to compare facts, but I can't seem to find anything about it online.
It wasn't a bad movie, but some of the dialogue was incredibly cheesy. Special effects wise, the movie wasn't bad for a Grade B, pretty much, and those possession scenes made it all worth while... that is, if you have nothing better to do. LOL
It wasn't a bad movie, but some of the dialogue was incredibly cheesy. Special effects wise, the movie wasn't bad for a Grade B, pretty much, and those possession scenes made it all worth while... that is, if you have nothing better to do. LOL
After their daughter's strange behavior alarms them, the discovery of her demonic possession being the cause of it all sends to parents to a local priest and attempts an exorcism to save her.
This here turned out to be quite the decent and wholly unoriginal take on the genre. The biggest thing with this one tends to be it's rather blatant and stereotypical use of the genre clichés which are quite apparent simply due to its' placement in the genre. This one really tends to wallow in those stereotypes featuring the sinful priest, the lustful temptress and the servant who's lost his way which all manages to fit into the traditional tropes of the genre. It's all stuff we've seen before and doesn't really alter that much in the way this goes for the traditional stories in these efforts. Where it differs from the norm is the actual exorcism scene itself which is pretty far removed from what usually happens here as this avoids the vomiting and levitation so frequently used in favor of trickery and deception which has quite a nice difference here but showcases another big flaw in that this one being way more talky than anything else. Nothing here really happens as it decides to spell out everything instead of the action route. The back-story for each of the characters and how they come to be stuck in the situation which is really lame and doesn't matter how it affects the action in the film of the film which suffers greatly because of how dull it is through all this talking rather than going for the action. The exorcism scene being such an utter afterthought that it takes up the final fifteen minutes makes this quite a rather unsatisfying effort just for the sheer brevity of it all really hurts this one overall as well as the other flaws within this one. About the only main saving grace for this one is the lead-up to the exorcism as the events themselves are handled well and create a pretty terrifying picture. Otherwise, this one is pretty flawed.
Rated R: Graphic Language, Violence, Nudity, mild sex scenes and themes of incest.
This here turned out to be quite the decent and wholly unoriginal take on the genre. The biggest thing with this one tends to be it's rather blatant and stereotypical use of the genre clichés which are quite apparent simply due to its' placement in the genre. This one really tends to wallow in those stereotypes featuring the sinful priest, the lustful temptress and the servant who's lost his way which all manages to fit into the traditional tropes of the genre. It's all stuff we've seen before and doesn't really alter that much in the way this goes for the traditional stories in these efforts. Where it differs from the norm is the actual exorcism scene itself which is pretty far removed from what usually happens here as this avoids the vomiting and levitation so frequently used in favor of trickery and deception which has quite a nice difference here but showcases another big flaw in that this one being way more talky than anything else. Nothing here really happens as it decides to spell out everything instead of the action route. The back-story for each of the characters and how they come to be stuck in the situation which is really lame and doesn't matter how it affects the action in the film of the film which suffers greatly because of how dull it is through all this talking rather than going for the action. The exorcism scene being such an utter afterthought that it takes up the final fifteen minutes makes this quite a rather unsatisfying effort just for the sheer brevity of it all really hurts this one overall as well as the other flaws within this one. About the only main saving grace for this one is the lead-up to the exorcism as the events themselves are handled well and create a pretty terrifying picture. Otherwise, this one is pretty flawed.
Rated R: Graphic Language, Violence, Nudity, mild sex scenes and themes of incest.
A girl named Isobel becomes possessed by a demon. The local priest (who formerly dated Isobel's sister) must try to save her, but the bigger problems are with the family's suspicions of each other rather than the demon in their daughter.
This film is directed by Ethan Wiley, the writer of "House" and the writer/director of "House II". I loved the first film and liked the second one even better, so you would think this would be a winner. Alas, this one looks like it was thrown together by first-year film students. Dawson Leery could have done better. I have thought about blaming new writer Ellary Eddy, especially because the idea is hardly original (are they trying to cash in on the fans of "The Exorcism of Emily Rose"?), but Wiley should have been able to do his magic.
Also, you'd like to think veteran horror stars Jeffrey Combs and James Russo would help this film. Russo (playing the bishop) barely shows up, and Combs has a great role as a sheriff... for the five minutes he's on screen (but I love the mustache). So, no help here.
After seeing "The Exorcist", all other exorcism films must be compared to the classic by default, no? And the demonic possession in this film was not scary in the least. No head-spinning or paranormal activity at all. Just a girl with a deep voice and runny makeup. All the "demonic" stuff was centered around the father accusing everyone of sleeping with his wife. As another reviewer wrote, "you get a lot of Isobel bouncing on her bed like it's a trampoline, hiding in her closet, and jumping from a hay-loft. Yeah, it's Chuck E. Cheese gone wild." That sadly sums up the extent of the "evil" in this movie.
If you want to watch a movie about family members who invent accusations and yell at each other while the possessed daughter sits in another room off-camera, this is the movie for you. But, if you don't mind my saying so, you have a horrible taste in film if this is what you're seeking.
The plot seems to focus on the father accusing a cowboy of sleeping with his wife (who didn't, but did sleep with his daughter) and of the veterinarian of sleeping with his wife (who might have, but denies it). And then you have a gardener who attacks the possessed girl with a crucifix and tells the family to call an exorcist, but once the priest arrives the gardener declares he does not believe in God. What was all the Bible-quoting you were doing five minutes ago?
A horrible exorcism movie. Horribler examples of what Combs and Russo are capable of. And such a sad display of directing after the "House" series of films became classic. I would like to pretend Wiley had no part in making this shamefully derivative and unoriginal, uninspired film. The power of Christ compels you to avoid this movie as if viewing it were a cardinal sin.
This film is directed by Ethan Wiley, the writer of "House" and the writer/director of "House II". I loved the first film and liked the second one even better, so you would think this would be a winner. Alas, this one looks like it was thrown together by first-year film students. Dawson Leery could have done better. I have thought about blaming new writer Ellary Eddy, especially because the idea is hardly original (are they trying to cash in on the fans of "The Exorcism of Emily Rose"?), but Wiley should have been able to do his magic.
Also, you'd like to think veteran horror stars Jeffrey Combs and James Russo would help this film. Russo (playing the bishop) barely shows up, and Combs has a great role as a sheriff... for the five minutes he's on screen (but I love the mustache). So, no help here.
After seeing "The Exorcist", all other exorcism films must be compared to the classic by default, no? And the demonic possession in this film was not scary in the least. No head-spinning or paranormal activity at all. Just a girl with a deep voice and runny makeup. All the "demonic" stuff was centered around the father accusing everyone of sleeping with his wife. As another reviewer wrote, "you get a lot of Isobel bouncing on her bed like it's a trampoline, hiding in her closet, and jumping from a hay-loft. Yeah, it's Chuck E. Cheese gone wild." That sadly sums up the extent of the "evil" in this movie.
If you want to watch a movie about family members who invent accusations and yell at each other while the possessed daughter sits in another room off-camera, this is the movie for you. But, if you don't mind my saying so, you have a horrible taste in film if this is what you're seeking.
The plot seems to focus on the father accusing a cowboy of sleeping with his wife (who didn't, but did sleep with his daughter) and of the veterinarian of sleeping with his wife (who might have, but denies it). And then you have a gardener who attacks the possessed girl with a crucifix and tells the family to call an exorcist, but once the priest arrives the gardener declares he does not believe in God. What was all the Bible-quoting you were doing five minutes ago?
A horrible exorcism movie. Horribler examples of what Combs and Russo are capable of. And such a sad display of directing after the "House" series of films became classic. I would like to pretend Wiley had no part in making this shamefully derivative and unoriginal, uninspired film. The power of Christ compels you to avoid this movie as if viewing it were a cardinal sin.
The farmer Ely (Randy Colton) finds a slaughtered coyote and his daughter Isabelle (Kristin Erickson) covered on blood and brings her home. She attacks her father and her mother Blanche (Leslie Fleming- Mitchell) and their employee Miguel (Del Zamora) tells that she is possessed and needs a priest and not a doctor. Priest Jacob (Cameron Daddo) arrives and along his exorcism, the demon Perlocus deceives the family and everyone that is trying to help Isabelle with lies and sins.
"Blackwater Valley Exorcism" is another movie of exorcism and the difference is the terrible screenplay and only Kristin Erickson has a convincing performance. The non-likable characters are not well developed and the messy story seems to be a soap opera of horror genre, with shallow dramatic situations. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Exorcismo – A Execução" ("Exorcism – The Execution")
"Blackwater Valley Exorcism" is another movie of exorcism and the difference is the terrible screenplay and only Kristin Erickson has a convincing performance. The non-likable characters are not well developed and the messy story seems to be a soap opera of horror genre, with shallow dramatic situations. My vote is three.
Title (Brazil): "Exorcismo – A Execução" ("Exorcism – The Execution")
Did you know
- ConnectionsReferenced in Brutal (2007)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- El exorcismo de Isabella
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $1,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 30 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content