I’m not a big fan of this style of filming. The fly on the wall type ‘Blair Witch Project’ and ‘Paranormal Activity’ has never worked for me. Maybe for some. I still wanted it to work and, yes, there were some good moments.
The filming wasn’t on the low end of bad, but somewhere in between.
After seeing ‘The Devil Inside’ at its UK premiere, I left the cinema a bit disappointed. Is it the worst movie of the year? It may well be for some. I like to stay middle of the road with this one.
The movie takes a trip to the Vatican, and I remember a statement that said they don’t endorse the movie. Seeing this, I thought I would be seeing something that I really shouldn’t.
Although, after reading the negative reviews from the US, I wasn’t expecting much.
However, I went into filmmaking with an open mind, as bad film press hasn’t always defended me in the past.
Isabelle heads to the Vatican complete with a camera to drop by her mother. The mother having killed people in a possessed and murderous state. Of course, the priests are involved, and Isabelle and the priests intend to perform an exorcism on her mother.
The dialogue is stale and the oaths of the Taken seemed somewhat obvious. Although, I guess the theme lends itself to this. However, some of the dialogue I did enjoy. It would be a mistake to say that everything was bad.
I was also not impressed by the filming techniques. Trying too hard to show drama through quick camera movements. Even ‘Paranormal Activity’ didn’t work for me, so this style of filming inferior to that movie was never going to hit the nail on the head. When the filming slowed down, everything was much more pleasing to the eye, so there were some positive technical aspects.
Anything more revealing? I expected such. There I was hoping to learn something more from this movie.
I learned some points surrounding the Catholic church. I liked the way the main characters banded together against convention to get the job done against demonic forces.
He didn’t reveal any great ideas to me. I just felt like I had seen most of the content before. However, anyone who has not seen this type of film before will find it very revealing.
However, it was brave to tackle this topic as it is a more than dangerous area. So this must be remembered when looking at the good merits of the film.
The film’s profits at the box office will outweigh the production costs, so my subsequent thoughts turned to the need to spend more funds on dialogue and actual scene-by-scene filming. I also found the characters boring and I think a better plot would have sharpened them up, and may have left the theater happier. But this lack of budget allows for this kind of filming, so we have to keep the positives. We get what it says on the tin.
So, stripping off the pink-tinted spectacles, she wasn’t bad at all.
There were only a few scary and creepy moments throughout the plot, but the creepy moments were good, I must admit.
Am I still struggling with the ending? Answers on a postcard please! Well, they all end up dying! How about that content? The ending was very interesting to watch, I must admit I didn’t expect it.
Was it the bigger budget, the bigger ideas, the bigger acting, or did it just need to be a bigger movie?
I think you have to take a realistic and positive view of the film.
Observing the weight of the funds and my excessive expectations, I began to think more positively about the presentation.
There was little about those intimate moments of fear. Perhaps it was the lack of these. Still wondering?
