AboveDeepBuggy Some things I liked some I did not.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

GL84 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.

jfarms1956 The movie would best be enjoyed by teenagers at a slumber party who like to scare and play tricks on one another. It truly reminds me of the Exorcist except the possessed doesn't float up into the air. The movie does have a few unexpected twists at the end. If you take it for its entertaining value/scaring value, you will go through some popcorn and maybe even want to hold a friends hand. It does have its scary moments. Be at peace with God and watch this movie. I don't know much about possession. All I do know is that this hocus pocus is not to be played with. Remember the movie is fiction and should be viewed as entertainment not as a guide for possession or exorcism.

Horror_UK I am watching this on the horror channel at this very moment. This film is based on actual events and if you believe in that sort of thing then it isn't a bad film. I have seen plenty of horror films, OK not the best but certainly not the worse film that has been put on telly especially the Horror Channel. As far as the acting is concerned, not too great but the Kristin Erickson who takes the part of the possessed girl was convincing alone, maybe not to the standards of Linda Blair but she acted as a possessed person would act. If you want to watch a "fun" horror film then check it out and then judge it for yourself. I commend anyone who makes a film on a low budget, they are very brave.

pastorZ While this movie did have a few scary moments (great use of music and film angles to build suspense), it's obvious director Ethan Wiley and scriptwriter Ellary Eddy didn't waste any time researching their subject matter; which also makes me question their claim that the exorcism scenes were overseen by a genuine Catholic bishop.Amongst the many inconsistencies: * Jacob the Roman Catholic priest, when we first meet him outside the church, is wearing an academic robe over his clericals rather than the typical alb, chasuble or surplice. Academic robes are commonly worn by Protestant ministers in liturgical denominations, not Roman Catholic priests. * Jacob the priest quotes some obscure and disturbing scripture about the angels taking up weapons. He attributes it to St. Paul. This verse is not from St. Paul's writings, neither is it in the Bible. I can't even find it in the Gnostic scriptures. * Jacob tells his bishop he doesn't believe in demon possession and turns down the request to study exorcism but does a complete 180 (later that same day?) within minutes of talking to possessed Isabelle. Sure, it's possible; but a little unrealistic. See Father Damien as a priest/psychologist in the original THE EXORCIST for a bit more realistic portrayal of a skeptic-turned-believer. * Miguel, the former priest turned farmhand, is the first to try an exorcism on Isabelle. He quotes scripture, and she quotes back. He says "I see you know Psalm 65" - she corrects him "that's Psalm 67" - they're both wrong. * Miguel, the former priest who just got done performing an exorcism - making the sign of the cross, calling on the name of Christ, applying holy water, etc. - tells Jacob he doesn't believe in church and he doesn't believe in God. (Maybe he's just conflicted?) Jacob enlists him to put on home-made vestments and have another go at it anyway. * Miguel, the former ROMAN CATHOLIC priest, crosses himself backwards (or Eastern Orthodox-style). As an Hispanic Roman Catholic who USED to be a priest, he should've crossed himself forehead to sternum, left-side to right side of chest.I had to read into the little side stories to get the notion Satan was messing with the whole family, not just Isabelle; but even in the end it was hard to say for sure if anyone was really guilty of the images in their heads or if it was all demonic trickery (except for the sheriff - it's pretty clear he was guilty).On the positive side: Isabelle was CREEPY - in my opinion she was the best part of the whole movie and I liked the plot twist with Claire.I'm just not sure if the movie was meant to be serious or a spoof.Listening to the running commentary with Cameron Daddo and Ethan Wiley, I'm inclined to believe it was a joke.