Nefarious

A number of reviews claiming that this is a 9 or 10 can't be taken seriously. Is this film at the level of The Godfather or Citizen Kane? Absolutely not. It is however not without its merits, which I'll discuss momentarily.

There are also very low reviews stating that it's trying to force a Christian worldview based on the dialogue between the two main characters, which takes up 90% of the run time. By that logic, so does almost any possession-type movie out there, The Exorcist included.

It should be noted that the production company behind this movie has conservative roots, but I didn't get the impression that it was overtly preachy at all, aside from maybe the abortion fiasco.

The script is laughably predictable, but I did feel that the dialogue kept me engaged. It was gripping to see how the mental sparring between the two main characters developed, even though it ended up with a fairly formulaic conclusion.

The acting was... sufficient. The possessed man, played by Sean Patrick Flannery, honestly felt a bit over-the-top at times, but was nevertheless a unique take on the character. The psychiatrist was played almost cardboard-like by Jordan Belfi unfortunately, which really was a disservice to the potential of the film.

Overall, it had my attention from beginning to end, which is more than I can say for a lot of other horror/suspense attempts out there. Entertaining result from a low-budget production.

Went as a favor with friends. I don't usually like 'Christian' films as they are usually cheesy. This was NOT - the acting of the possessed inmate made Anthony Hopkins portrayal of Hanibal Lecter look amateurish. Dialogue was good considering it's like Dinner with Andre set in a prison. It was a 'Hell' of a lot better than anything I've seen (save Top Gun Maverick) in the last oh 10 years. Definitely worth the time and ticket price. Got to laugh though looking at the metrics - seem suspiciously skewed low compared to reviews. Anyone with rudimentary stats class knows somethings wrong here. Nice try -

NEFARIOUS is not the kind of movie I would normally go to see. I did, however, have an idea what it was about and respect the writers and directors. Sean Patrick Flannery performed his role with intensity, superbly portraying a man possessed by evil, as well as showing the fragility of the man Edward. Jordan Belfi was also a worthy opponent, or perhaps victim, as the psychiatrist sent to analyze Edward's mental condition. And Edward's future was always hanging in the balance. .There is a believable portrayal of demon possession; and, if you can tolerate that and a rather violent event near the end, I recommend this movie.

Once again, a good movie is panned by so-called critics simply because it is rooted in a Christian worldview. NEFARIOUS isn't a perfect film. It is, however, a gripping, intellectual thriller that seizes one's attention from the get go and never loosens its grip.

NEFARIOUS depicts a battle of wits between a condemned serial killer (Sean Patrick Flanery) and a psychiatrist charged with determining mental competency for execution (Jordan Belfi). The condemned man claims to be a demon, and this sets up the film's central conflict.

With the bulk of the action taking place between two characters in one room, a tight script is essential. NEFARIOUS sports riveting dialog that creates and maintains suspense in this confrontation between mismatched characters. The demon outwits his opponent at every turn, while his foe swims in a sea of smug superiority and unjustified self-righteousness. That the story is really a battle between evil and lesser evil, rather than a battle between good and evil, makes the film infinitely more interesting.

Flanery's past work has not been particularly memorable, but this performance will stay with viewers for the long haul. One expects over-the-top bombast and supernatural shenanigans in low-budget, independent movies about demonic possession. Flanery instead delivers a pleasant surprise: subtlety. His admirable performance both interests and chills, and it's not the standard fare.

NEFARIOUS could have scored one more star if the second lead had been better cast. Belfi gives a passable performance, but one that pales in comparison to Flanery's. As an aside, Belfi's character is 35 years old, and Belfi is 10 very obvious years older. It's an unforced error. There's no reason short of vanity that the character couldn't have been true to the actor's age. In fact, it would have made him a bit more interesting. Fortunately, the script does allow Belfi's character to grow and change for the better, which props up the otherwise mediocre performance. One wonders what the part could have been in the hands of a more skilled actor.

The ongoing, reflexive bias against films with a faith message is unfortunate. One doesn't have to agree with every element of the filmmakers' message in order to recognize and acknowledge with fairness a creative work's virtues. NEFARIOUS is a solid, thoughtful drama with plenty of suspense, interestingly imperfect characters, and a message that's thought-provoking if you're willing to engage with different points of view.

Unfortunately, these days, that seems to be too much to ask.

What was the purpose of shadow-banning this movie? If 80% of the films being released have occult, hermetic, and gnostic themes, why is it so repulsive to have a film that explores the Christian worldview?

This movie exemplified the "Streisand effect" that the mainstream media was so trying to keep away from the viewing public that it drew me in even more. I wasn't keen on watching this because modern-day horror has gone too far. Since Hostile, everything has been a sadomasochist torture session that doesn't sit well with me. But in no way when I consider this a horror movie; even the film producers did this film a disservice by marketing the film in this manner. A psychological thriller should have been the label and been positioned in that space.

Sean Patrick's Flattery was utterly unrecognizable to me from his chronicles of the Young Indiana Jones Days(Too bad he's not playing Indy in the Dial of ((dead on Arrival)) Destiny".) His serial killer portrayal was a stellar performance, definitely a high-level for the genre. Totally unrecognizable reminded me of James McAvoy in "Split." It's impressive when you play multiple personality/disassociative disorders and nail it. We've also seen it not work, a.k.a. Doom Patrol's "Crazy Jane." His performance holds the whole story together; it makes it believable. The most authentic-seeming/feeling of demon possession; I wouldn't throw Linda Blair's head-twisting performance in the exorcist because that was just pure sensationalism. Cary Solomon does an adequate job as his foil, more of a craftsman performance. He felt he was direct to the DVD-quality actor overshadowed by a masterclass performance.

The majority of the film was shot in one room, and those are typically more difficult films to nail. It was like a stage play on the screen. I liked the pacing. I liked the overall story architecture; it had a pleasing, well, constructive conclusion. This type of story tends to go off the rails at the end, so I was glad they kept the crazy train on the tracks, All Aboard!!