5/10
No evidence the main subject was possessed, why'd she seek exorcism?
7 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Odd little film. Before an exorcist will perform the rite, you have to be evaluated by a psychiatrist and then there needs to be evidence you speak in a language not known to you, have supernatural wisdom about other people, have the ability to manipulate items around you/cause paranormal activity, etc. She had none of these abilities. The women in the crowd scene were all simply making noises and twisting about; that wasn't an exorcism either. So not sure what the point of the film was. The main exorcist never performed an exorcism on camera, just talked about those he had. Another claimed to have done at least 70,000 (!) but perhaps it was wrongly translated it meant 7000. The one priest who met with the couple never asked for proof as to her possession. All she did was moan a bit, say that she never forgave her father for not loving her. By the end of the film, she said she had hope she was nearing her "liberation" and if she was fully delivered, glory to God, and if not, glory to God. But we never understood what was troubling her, other than what she said. After about 30 minutes, this all became rather aimless and by the end, it simply ceased, with no one better or wiser.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed