User Reviews

After years of wondering what the fuss about Abby was, I couldn't help but feel a little let down once I saw it. It's your average Exorcist ripoff but with less convincing effects, scripting, and acting. It plays more like a bizarre comedy than a horror film for most of the run time and runs out of steam midway through. Carol Speed gives a fun performance as the title character and is the main reason to see it besides the unintentional laugh moments.

"The Blackorcist," as this was supposedly nearly called, is actually not as blatant a rip-off of Exorcist, The (1973) as Chi sei? (1975) AKA Beyond the Door, or Seytan (1974) AKA The Turkish Exorcist. The latter in particular steals many scenes shot-for-shot (though not actual footage), but does actually steal same recording of the music "Tubular Bells."

Abby is pretty enjoyable. I saw the Cinefear DVD of it, and hopefully some other company will be able to do a proper transfer of the film at some point. Credit to Cinefear for getting it out, though, and even including some extras.

Abby is sort of the equivalent of Linda Blair's character in The Exorcist, but Abby is not a young girl but a young married woman; her husband and father-in-law are both priests. I'm not certain what denomination they were. The father dresses like a Catholic priest with black shirt and white collar, but has a wife and son. The son wears a khaki shirt with a white collar.

The father unwittingly releases a demon in Africa, which for some reason possesses Abby in the US. The demon causes Abby to swear rather profusely - I was surprised.

If a new DVD is ever released, there was some Greek, Hindi, and an African language spoken by the demon and the priest, and it would be interesting to get some optional subtitles for those scenes. The text of the lawsuit against the movie would also be interesting.

For a good while after it was first released, ABBY was a difficult film to see: that's because Warner Bros, the producers of the THE EXORCIST, sued AIP, the producers of ABBY, claiming that it was nothing more than a cheap rip-off of their classic horror film. Well, they were right. ABBY is a rip-off, and that's obvious right from the very beginning; both films are about possessed women and the exorcist attempting to save them; both have similar scenes of mini-hurricanes tearing up the inside of the rooms, and even the demons sound alike. Still, most of the B-movies I watch are rip-offs of one film or another, so I didn't let this fact bother me too much.

ABBY starts off on a good footing. This time around, the demon is an African one, accidentally released on an archaeological dig by the exorcist himself. I liked this angle; it worked well. Early scenes of Abby suffering possession are genuinely creepy; there's lots of saliva and an excruciating moment when she self-harms. However, about halfway through the movie, the plot seems to lose momentum; this may be because the production was interrupted by severe tornadoes and the bad luck that apparently plagued it thereafter. The last half of the film has Abby going on a rampage through town, making love to unsuspecting guys and killing them (although we never see what happens). This latter part of the film is quite dull, padded out with endless scenes of disco dancing and bad acting from some extras, and it only picks up in the last ten minutes for an exorcism that promises more than it delivers.

Essentially, the low budget is what hampers this film. Carol Speed, who is quite effective as the possessed woman, doesn't wear any make-up towards the end like Linda Blair did; she has a pair of scary contact lenses, but otherwise it's all down to her fierce expression. The supernatural stuff is limited to furniture and people being thrown around rooms which quickly becomes tiresome, although there's a hilarious aside in which a limo starts smoking which didn't make much sense; more stuff like that would have made this a better film. Director William Girdler, whose short-lived '70s career produced half a dozen cheapie horrors, works hard at instilling atmosphere and dread, and he succeeds in disturbing the viewer with some subliminal inserts of a rubbery demon head. But that's about it.

The cast is decent for a low-budget '70s blaxploitation movie. Headlining it is William Marshall, well-known of course for his turn as BLACULA, who puts in another good turn as the commanding exorcist. Carol Speed, as Abby, is very convincing, and outdoes what Linda Blair did; while Blair's horrific performance relied on special effects, Speed's relies on her acting ability, and she comes up trumps. Also along for the ride are Austin Stoker (ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13), playing a hard-ass cop who may well be a forerunner to his character in the John Carpenter film, and Terry Carter, giving a strong performance as Abby's put-upon husband. For fun, I spotted British character actor Don Henderson as a sleazy nightclub patron, just before he appeared as the titular menace in the Peter Cushing flick THE GHOUL.

If the second half of this movie had been as strong as the first half, I would have enjoyed it far more. But I can't help thinking that the behind-the-scenes troubles succeeded in scuppering this film's promising aspects.

ABBY DOESN'T NEED A MAN -- THE DEVIL IS HER LOVER NOW!! This very rare film which I was lucky enough to see the one week it played here in downtown Los Angeles during the Seventies (the prints were destroyed soon after the makers of The Exorcist sued for copyright infringement and won) is not only a great entry into the possession genre, but also one of the prime examples of true blaxploitation cinema. It stars William Marshall of Blacula fame as the exorcist, Carol Speed from The Big Bird Cage as the possessed woman, Austin Stoker from Assault On Precinct Thirteen, Terry Carter, and Juanita Moore from Imitation Of Life... truly an exceptional cast brought together in a film that must be seen to be believed.

Carol Speed portrays the girl named Abby who is a minister's wife and marriage counselor, qualities that do not prevent a demon from entering her body in one unusual shower scene. Abby then spouts foul language, goes nuts in a church, scares a white woman to death, jumps a funeral director in a hearse, acts like she's on drugs and generally gets very weird throughout. William Marshall is the man who must deal with the demon, and here his Shakespearean training shows. Austin Stoker is the friend who helps Terry Carter deal with a possessed wife. Juanita for some reason keeps talking about having a good man and eating fried chicken. All the cliches are in this one, and only the truly jaded won't be offended in some way!

SEE Abby throw a man across a room! SEE Abby seduce a man in a hearse! SEE Carol Speed talk like Isaac Hayes! SEE one obviously derivative yet well done scene after another! SEE an exorcism in a disco! SEE Abby fight her way out of a hospital! SEE Juanita Moore look like she wished she was elsewhere! Try and catch this one if you can, and become one of the initiated!

This was a film that I heard about through podcasts and it has an interesting back-story. It appears that it was pulled from being shown really as is feels like a blaxploitation version of The Exorcist. I didn't even realize after coming in to write this that it was directed by William Girdler. I decided to watch this for my podcast as I wanted to celebrate Black History Month and the sub-genre this falls into, I gave it a watch. The synopsis is a marriage counselor who becomes possessed by the demon of sexuality when her father-in-law frees it while on an expedition in Africa. He returns home, along with his son and a policeman, to perform an African exorcism on her.

We start this movie off with Bishop Garnet Williams (William Marshall) on a send off party with his students. I will admit, this is a ham-fisted way to introduce Bishop Williams to us. He is a doctor of theology, amongst other things, and going to Africa for an archeological dig. This takes him to Nigeria where he finds something that is in honor of Eshu, the Nigerian god of sexuality. It is opened and something flees from it. We see it as smoke and wind, as well as flashes of a spooky face.

Back in the United States, a family is moving into a new home. We have Rev. Emmett Williams (Terry Carter). He's the son of Bishop Williams. There does seem to be a kind of strained relationship that is introduced to us. Rev. Williams is married to Abby (Carol Speed). Helping them to move in is her mother Miranda Potter (Juanita Moore) and her brother who is a detective, Cass Potter (Austin Stoker).

That night Emmett is woken up by something in the attic and there's some loud sounds as things are falling. He wakes up Abby and she scolds him for doing so. The two of them make love, but the next morning, something seems to be stalking her in the shower. We then get scenes where she has a violent coughing episode in church while her husband is giving his sermon. She also has outbursts.

Abby is taken to the doctor for tests, but they can't find anything wrong. Emmett reaches out to his father who is still in Africa. At first, Garnet really doesn't see anything as too serious, but soon realizes he might be the cause of what is going on. Abby becomes violent and her family starts to fear the worst.

I guess I really should cover the elephant in the room for this film. As I said, it really is a knock-off of The Exorcist. It is the reason I'm assuming it hasn't had a proper release as the courts ruled this was the case. It is really hard to not see the similarities with just some twists on it. We have Garnet who goes over to Africa and unleashes this entity. It takes over someone and makes them act out of character. There's the sequence where they get tested, being told there's nothing wrong and that mental illness could be the next step. We also see the perversion of religion. There are flashes of the demon's face which were spliced in at different times. The exorcism scene is kind of similar as well, but again all of these things are done with a blaxploitation twist. It is interesting though that they were done the same year, so the only explanation for if things were taken would be that Girdler and Layne had read the novel and this came out later in the year, so possible the movie itself.

Despite the similarities, I like the changes this film does. Not making it necessarily better, but we're getting to see some different aspects for sure. The first thing is that Abby is an adult woman. She is married and she is a beacon in the church. She just got her license to be a marriage counselor, but even more than that, she volunteers a lot of time there and is a God-fearing woman. On top of that, she's married to Emmett who is the local minister. I really dig that this movie is having the demon wanting to get revenge on Garnet, who released it as well as someone who could also possible defeat it as well. Instead of having the loss of innocence of a child, we have the corruption of a woman who is living within the rules of her religion. The demon is perverting that.

Going along with this idea of religion, being that it is showing the culture of African-Americans and I use that term here as Garnet is studying over in Africa. I like that it is combining their past of this African deity of mischief and sexuality with that the more modern culture of black people and their newer Christian beliefs. This is embodied a lot by Garnet as well. During the exorcism scene, he is wearing his Catholic priest garb, but then also dons more traditional African priest clothing over top of it. I took this as marrying the two together in order to save Abby.

Taking this to the pacing, I thought it was well done there as well. It benefits from only running 87 minutes, but I also think that they remove filler as well. There's a deep story here where Garnet is proud of his son, but there seems to be some animosity toward his father. It doesn't necessarily delve too much, but I would assume it is because his father is so wrapped up in his work that he's semi-neglected him. By coupling that strained relationship with the perversion of Abby and the two needing to come together, that also including black culture from the past to the present as well. I think we see the progression of what happens to Abby and where things end up. The ending was solid for what we were building to.

Something that wasn't great across the board though was the acting. I'm not going to come down too harsh for the caliber of acting and the budget they were working with. That's not to say we don't have good acting. I'm a big fan of Marshall and I just love his presence on the screen. It is great to see him go from Blacula to Garnet here and I just believe him to be this prestigious and respectful man. Carter is also good and I like the growth of his character. Speed is also really good as well. I love seeing her normal and then what happens to her through the possession. She as a few moments of overacting though that stood out to me. Stoker is fine in support. The real issues come from the other supporting actors. They just feel amateurish and I think in part of that is how things are written to be introduce things. Also props to Bob Holt who voices the demon as well, it was quite creepy to be honest.

As for the effects of the movie, there doesn't seem to be a lot actually. I like the make-up that was done for the possessed Abby. They lightened her skin and put in contacts which made her look pretty creepy. We get the use of smoke and some other random effects. They don't really stand out, but for a movie like this, they don't really need to. It is effective for is being used. I also thought the cinematography was well done also and I had no complaints.

Now with that said, this movie was better than I was expecting. I knew that this is considered the blaxploitation version of The Exorcist. I can see that here, but can also see that this is pretty different in what they're working with as well. It has some interesting concepts that are explored and they actually ticks off some of my boxes for things I really like to see play out. The acting from the stars is good, but there are some slight issues with supporting players. Not a lot in the way of effects. It doesn't necessarily need them though. I never got bored and thought it built the story in an interesting way. The soundtrack was fine for what was needed and if I'm going to comment on anything, it would be the creepiness of the demon's voice by Holt. I'd say this is above average. It has some minor flaws, but overall an interesting piece of cinema.

I had been wanting to see this movie since I saw the trailer way back in "74 and I was a young lad. Finally found a copy through ebay in 2002 and it was just as fun as I thought it would be. It is a blatant but cheap (and I mean cheap) version of The Exorcist with all black actors. Definately worth a look if you like really bad rip-offs that are SO bad that they are funny. It's too bad though that Pam Grier wasn't cast as the lead character. Maybe she thought it was even too bad for her to do. Personally, I think it's fun and should be in anyone's collection if they are into campy movies of this genre. Some others that should not be missed are Anticrist, L aka The Tempter and The Antichrist in USA and Beyond the Door which stars Juliet Mills (Nanny and the Professor). Both are Italian movies and really fun. In the first, the possessed woman actually rims a goat and in the latter, Juliet (Nanny) Mills does a lot of throwing up of black gook, levitations, and spinning. The first of a stream of Exorcist rip-offs. Look for the newest installation of The Exorcist coming out later in 2004. Should be interesting.

Though I knew there were some DVD copies around, I guess I should thank YouTube for finally being able to watch this movie since that's where I discovered it. Having seen it, I can see why Warner Brothers sued and won their lawsuit against American International for blatantly copying WB's hit The Exorcist. Sure, the differences are that one involved a girl child and the other a grown woman but they both have shaking furniture and demonic possession in which they both say very vulgar things involving sex. Okay, with that out of the way, let me say what I think of it. I thought it was hilarious whenever the title character played by Carol Speed had-through the voice of Bob Holt-said all those blatantly provocative remarks to various people but after that, I managed to also find some genuine scares and thrills. Both Ms. Speed and William Marshall as Bishop Garnet Williams who tries to get the demon out of her provide great presence in their scenes together. But the supporting players of Terry Carter (Rev. Emmett Williams, Abby's husband and Garnet's son), Austin Stoker (Abby's brother Det. Cass Potter), and especially Juanita Moore (Miranda "Momma" Potter) also hold their own against them. If there's one thing I have a beef with, it's the print I watched. Perhaps because of that lawsuit, no one's bothered to restore it. So the one I saw looked washed out. Still, the sound wasn't bad so that's a plus. Really, all I'll say now is if you get the chance to watch Abby, go for it! P.S. How interesting that after not sharing a scene in The Mack, Ms. Speed and Ms. Moore played daughter and mother in this. And nice to hear Carol's writing and singing skills with the song "My Soul is a Witness".

Returning from a trip to Nigeria, a priest returns to the U.S. realizing that he accidentally released a primitive God from it's hiding place deep underground has possessed a member of his clergy and uses his religious training to put an end to the ordeal before she gets further from recovery.

This here did have some rather nice stuff to it that did help it. One of it's best features is the fact that this one does a really decent job of being a solid genre entry, as this does a really impressive job of running through the genre standards. The demon is released quite early on with an utterly effective sequence down in the underground crypts where the incredibly creepy caves are used to grand effect in giving off a great atmosphere with the howling wind and echoing voices adding to the feel of it and then segues nicely into the family moving into the new house and coming across the fact that she's become part of its' plans which enables it to follow along the same storyline as expected here. The times when the film utilizes those tactics, from the early scenes of her getting possessed which includes her shaking the rooms and walls, encountering the demon within the shower or fantasizing about cutting herself which are all creepy enough on their own before being added on with the similarity factor that comes from the rather shameless way its homages are shoe-horned into these segments. There's a lot to like from the fun with the family members always trying to get her under control rather than doing anything more original with the setup, and that continues on into the idea of her being possessed which are quite fun since this one doesn't have the excruciating factor of waiting around endless minutes watching the Church figures deal with something that's painfully obvious to everyone else that something must be done yet nothing is. That leads into the exorcism scene that comes with all the theatrics and shouting expected as well as the fact that seeing all the flying furniture and bodies makes for a great time. Plus, there's also the rather great and fun experience when the charm is removed and the spirits come out, and it's all the better for it. As well as the fact that the make-up on the possession looks great as well, with the truly out-there wig and facial deformities which make it feel really great, these here are what make the film entertaining, but it did have a few relatively detrimental flaws to it. The main one is that the behavior changes that the possessed undergoes aren't very frightening at all, merely shouting profanities, acting very sexual or attacking others around them. These aren't that great at making that person a target of fear, which is the main course of action with this kind of film. It needs to be able to get across the fact that they're dangerous, which is accomplished through the actions they undergo and this one simply doesn't do that very well which is where the film fails at. The other relatively big flaw here is that there's a decided lack of action in the middle segment, which is all the signs of possession coming out though the film decides to inject them in the middle of the most mundane activities ever. Having her suddenly break out into a profane rant at the end of a dinner party doesn't have a lot of weight since it comes at the end and is a rather irritating recurring tactic. The dance- hall sequence serves no use other than getting a suitable location for the exorcism, but it goes on for too long with no payoff and really should've been trimmed or omitted, but that's easily overlooked compared to the other flaws here.

Rated R: Extreme Graphic Language, Violence and Brief Nudity.

I have been trying to find a copy of ABBY for some time and tonight I have finally seen this supposedly lost treasure. Apparently, Warner Brothers Studios felt it was rip-off of THE EXORCIST and the film was pulled from circulation prematurely. It also was not seen on video or laser disk and only recently appeared on DVD. The print is horrid and looks as if someone sat with a video camera and recorded it as the film was being played--it was that bad. The colors were a mess, too--most of the film had a strong red tint to it. Additionally, there were scratches throughout--making it the ugliest quality DVD I have ever seen.

Well, despite the horrid quality of the disk, I do feel that the film is unique and not exactly a copy of THE EXORCIST. In fact, there are so many differences that it seems ludicrous today that Warner felt they had any claim at all to stop the film. Plus, quality-wise it wasn't like anyone would mistake ABBY for THE EXORCIST!! While the DVD extras proclaim it as a masterpiece and it "was NOT bad like the Blacula or Blackenstein movies", I heartily disagree. While I have yet to see BLACKENSTEIN, the Blacula movies (BLACULA and SCREAM BLACULA SCREAM) look like Academy Award winners compared to ABBY. Other than all three films starring William Marshall (a capable actor stuck in cheap films), they just don't compare. The Blacula films weren't bad at all and ABBY is a wretched film with wretched production values from start to finish. The acting, aside from Marshall, is very, very amateur, the sets and props looked bargain basement and the story was just silly. Worst of all, though, were the demon special effects that weren't much better than something you could make at home.

So what does all this add up to? Well, not a good movie, certainly...but also a movie that is fun to watch for its camp value. In other words, it's so stupid and so inane, that it's great for a laugh. So far in my life, I've seen about 50 so-called "blaxploitation" films and this is the worst--even worse than the dull Dolemite films. Now THAT'S bad!!

It always ticks me off when the drooling fanboy geeks on various internet web sites specializing in rare, obscure and offbeat cult cinema savagely ridicule particular DVDs because the transfers aren't polished and spit-shined to crystalline sparkling perfection or the discs don't have enough fancy-schmancy extras to appease their picky snotnose expectations. The unjustly vilified Cinefear DVD for William Girdler's enjoyably trashy 70's blaxploitation demonic possession hoot "Abby" is an excellent example of what I'm talking about. 70's drive-in flick aficionados the world over should be rejoicing that this heretofore hard-to-find and never officially available on video feature has been rescued from oblivion and put out on DVD so the option to see it is a valid and easily pursuable one. The fact of the matter is that whenever a movie comes out on DVD it gets a second lease on life and another chance to be discovered by a new audience that might have missed it when it first came out. Cinefear should be applauded for putting "Abby" out on DVD instead of being fiercely ridiculed for same. Contrary to what the hateful naysayers have articulated on numerous DVD review web sites the DVD itself is actually quite good. Besides a perfectly acceptable quality transfer, the extras alone make it a solid and praiseworthy release: Said tasty extras include the theatrical trailer, a radio spot, a still and poster gallery, and, best of all, an intelligent, informative and well-written essay on the troubled history of this gnarly little nugget. So ignore all the undeserved negative criticism and give the DVD a chance. It's well worth checking out and makes for a sound addition to your horror exploitation library.

The blaxploitation genre sometimes went into horror territory - everyone has heard of Blacula, most people have heard of Blackenstein but considerably less folks have heard of Abby. What this one was, was a black version of The Exorcist. It actually made millions at the box office on release but was pulled from theatres after Warner Bros accused producers AIP of ripping off their movie. And to this day it has barely been released on any format of home media and there is even a strongly believed theory that Warners not only put out a lawsuit but in fact confiscated all prints! All of this is a poor show from Warners really, as this is no more of a rip off than various other films from the time and its African voodoo element in fact gives it an entirely original angle.

Its story has a professor unwittingly unleashing a West African sex spirit in Nigeria, which goes on to possess a woman back in the U. S. This leads to her vomiting in church and exhibiting all manner of other anti-social behaviours. The title character is played with some energy and commitment by Carol Speed and Blacula actor William H Marshall takes on the gravitas role of the professor. It's a pretty good film overall and not as campy and silly as you may expect. Hopefully it will get a proper release on home media one day.

There are a few good performances in Abby, but it's never anywhere near as shocking or memorable as the film it's trying copy, The Exorcist. After the midpoint, things take a nosedive and it becomes repetitive and boring as Abby goes out to bars trying to seduce men and her husband and father-in-law trying to find her.

Scary, hilarious, and vastly better than its reputation suggests, Abby has a number of moments where you don't know whether to laugh or scream. I, personally, ended up laughing most of the time. One of these scenes has Abby (Carol Speed) beating up a concerned family friend while chanting, "Here we go 'round the merry-go-round, merry-go-round, merry-go-round...." Another moment has Abby obscenely salivating over chicken blood. Still another is when she rips open her blouse and begins spouting four-letter words at a marriage-counseling session. Then there's the discotheque exorcism, with the demon bellowing and swearing as the joint is telekinetically demolished. A lot of the movie is ridiculous, yes, but that's why it's so horrific. If it were rational, what would be the point?

Some scenes, however, fall off the humor-horror fence onto the comedy side. The best example of this is Abby's performance of the soulful "My Soul is a Witness" in the church choir. The problem is, Carol can't sing! Another character mentions her "angelic voice." Apparently the angels live in her sinuses! Then there's the use of fried chicken as a constant theme and Juanita Moore's sage pearls of wisdom about "lovin' a good man."

The performances range from passable to quite good. The best comes from the always dignified, commanding William Marshall as the exorcist. Paula Henderson's main theme, "Will We Find Our Tomorrows," is memorable, as is most everything else about the movie. Though it's often silly, Abby is never dull.

Trivia: Made for $500,000, Abby was a substantial success, grossing $9 million during its month in theaters. After that month, Warners sued and profits were frozen. Director William Girdler died two weeks after the suit was settled and never saw a dime.

Take the essential ingredients of William Friedkin's The Exorcist, add 'fros, flares, fried chicken and funky grooves, and what you have is Abby, the 1974 demonic blaxploitation flick from director William Girdler that unsurprisingly received a great deal of attention from a very unamused Warner Brothers legal department.

Just like The Exorcist, the film's supernatural events are kick-started by the discovery of an ancient artifact by an elderly man of the cloth—in this case, it's a small carved box depicting the powerful sex demon Eshu that is unearthed by African-American bishop Garnet Williams (William Marshall). And just like The Exorcist, the discovery of this item results in a case of possession—only instead of a twelve year old girl, the victim is the bishop's daughter in law, Abby Williams (Carol Speed). Within a matter of days, God-fearing Christian Abby is transformed from a gospel singing pillar of the community into a blasphemous, vomiting, sex-mad harlot, eventually driving her desperate husband Rev. Emmett Williams (Terry Carter) to enlist the help of his father to cast out evil Eshu.

Instead of the classy style of Friedkin's movie, Girdler's effort is cheap, trashy and unintentionally hilarious, which in my book makes it almost as entertaining as the film it so blatantly rips off. Speed attacks her performance with gusto, coughing, drooling, puking, speaking in guttural fashion, getting slutty with total strangers, and even appearing in cheesy demon make-up for several subliminal flashes that simply scream 'plagiarism'; meanwhile, those around her play their roles with absolute sincerity, doing their utmost to look concerned and frightened (but failing badly).

Despite not being in the slightest bit original, shocking or scary, Abby is easily one of the most watchable (ie., funny) Exorcist rip-offs I have seen; I say 'get your mitts on a copy', even if it is the VHS-quality DVD release that seems to be the only version currently available.

A possession film about a marriage counselor who becomes possessed by a Demon of Sexuality, when her father in law, an Exorcist, freed it while in Africa.

He returns home, along with his son and a policeman to perform an African Exorcism on her.

One of the better blaxplotation flicks to come our of the 70s. The story is OK, and the acting is decent and although a low budget movie, the special effects are sort of kewl.

I'd give it a solid 5. It's worth watching id you are a fan of the genre.

I remember seeing this movie with my father as a teenager in Chicago.as a matter of fact we saw it 9 times in one day.from am to pm.glad we did because it was pull off by a lawsuit by good o warner bros.The Exorcist was good for the white folks and scare a lot of us.Abby was a version for the afro-American.just like Blacula version of Dracula.Carol speed did her best performance since The Mack.the late William Marshall playing the black priest leashing out the sexual demon from Africa..the f/x was cheesy but funny.what do you want from a movie that only cost $200,000 to make.William Girdler never get to see the $4 millions but wasn't afraid to challenge the exorcist or warner bros.this was all a races attack,because beyond the door wasn't attack as much as Abby.but i agree that Abby should be release on a good DVD remaster.Cinefear is okay but it's like watching a bootleg version.i enjoy Abby back then and i still enjoy Abby today in the good o tropical island..

A minister's wife becomes possessed by a demon that was probably unleashed by his father while he was excavating in Nigeria. If you take 'The Exorcist', 'The Amityville Horror' and 'Scream Blacula, Scream', and mash them all together, you have 1974's 'Abby'. I was not expecting much from this film and maybe that's why I am SO shockingly surprised at it's quality. It's not "so bad it's good", it's just good! Although the disco music seems out of place in a horror setting like this, the acting is decent and the story is well told. There is no doubt that the plot is a REALLY close copy of a much more popular movie, but to me that doesn't hurt it one bit. In fact when you see the lead character Abby starting to act weird, you almost feel true sorrow for her and her family because if you ever watched 'The Exorcist', and I'm sure 99.998% of you saw that film before this one, you have some idea of what is in store for them all. Because of Abby's age, they are allowed to show a little more sexual deviance which is a nice evil touch, especially from a minister's wife. The special effects are well done and the constantly changing voices within the possessed lead female are great. The movie itself has a very creepy element to it and it is a little more action packed than it's big studio twin (slightly older twin). In fact, if you just look at it as a sequel to 'The Exorcist' rather than a rip off, I think you'll enjoy it much more. Trust me, Friedkin would much rather have 'Abby' as his sequel than the real 'Exorcist Part 2'! The crew of 'Abby' had plenty of original ideas outside of the film that they were copying and the movie deserves a lot more respect.

A bishop-archaeologist-lecturer Garnet Williams(William Marshall) excavates the cave during a digging expedition in Nigeria.Big mistake,because he releases Eshu,Nigerian demon of sexuality.Garnet's daughter-in-law Abby(Carol Speed)is possessed by the entity.Abby who is devoted Church goer begins acting oddly engaging in self-mutilation,verbal and physical abuse of her husband,mocking the Church and finally slutting herself over town.Vastly entertaining and very enjoyable "The Exorcist" clone with plenty of cheese and pulsating funk soundtrack.Overall,I think that "Abby" deserves to be seen and more appreciated,especially if you are into blacksploitation sub-genre.7 possessions out of 10.

One of the strangest, wildest, and weirdest blaxsploitation movies, Abby is an African-American retelling of The Exorcist, with Carol Speed as the possessed title character. The chaste and devout wife of a reverend, Abby spends her time as a marriage counselor in her neighborhood parish. Through mind-boggling misfortune having to do with the accidental release of a vicious demon, Abby begins to exhibit odd behavior (giving out salacious marital advice in one hysterical scene) and a noticeable change in the vocal register. Transforming from the practically virginal naif into a sex-starved ghoul with a hyena's chortle, Abby takes off into the night of dance clubs and singles bars. Father-in-law William Marchall races home from Africa to perform the exorcism, but will he be too late?

Man, those big shots over at Warner Bros. have absolutely no sense of humor and/or brotherly spirit! Of course this Blaxploitation gem, as well as the Italian efforts "Beyond the Door" and "Lisa and the Devil", is an obvious rip-off of their smash hit "The Exorcist" ... Even the smallest child can see that. But was it really necessary to sue the makers and force them to take these drive-in favorites out of circulation? This is just my personal opinion, but these bizarre imitations are much more amusing than the real thing. The plots are far more over-the-top, the language & make-up effects are usually a lot more extreme and they always feature an (unintentionally?) comical atmosphere. "Abby" is a prime example of 70's fabulousness! The plot is nearly identical to "The Exorcist", but everything else is neatly adjusted to the "Blaxploitation" standards. We have a solid, experienced and charismatic cast, including William Marshall ("Blacula"), Austin Stoker ("Assault on Precinct 13") and Carol Speed ("The Mack") as the titular demon-possessed preacher's wife. When Bishop Williams accidentally releases the spirit of the malicious African deity Eshu, it somehow travels overseas and takes possession of the bishop's daughter-in-law Abby. The poor lady transforms from a deeply religious and loyal wife into a foul-mouthed, aggressive and luscious tramp. She talks with a deep voice, pukes all types of nasty-colored stuff and invades disco parties to seduce random black pimps. There's a minimum of tension and intellectual dialogs to be found in "Abby", but it's reasonably fast-paced and very entertaining. "Abby" is cheap and doesn't contain any real special effects (like rotating heads, for example), but still you should give it a chance. Perhaps I'm slightly biased, as I'm a giant fan of director William Girdler. He was one of the most versatile American horror directors of the 1970's, up until his tragic & premature death.