The Exorcism of Molly Hartley (2015 Video) User Reviews

A better haunting than expected, but still trapped in ritual of unholy jump scares and unhygienic demonic vomit.

[quincytheodore · 5/10 · 11 October 2015]

Molly Hartley is not a well-known name on possession game, it's also a straight to DVD title which might not instill hope for quality. Surprisingly, it has a few nifty gimmicks at play as it tries to conjure different setup than most of its haunted peers. It also, sadly, falls face first with corny scares and unintentionally funny moment just when it needs to deliver the horror.

Story follows not only Molly (Sarah Lind), but also the disgraced Father John (Devon Sawa). After a botched exorcism, mostly due to his part, John is convicted and lost his faith. Meanwhile, Molly displays odd tendency for murder and unworldly pranks. Instead of going Vatican on her, they throw her to jail, which admittedly a rather realistic choice of action.

There are a few different developments that occasionally show glimpse of horror. It creates the right atmosphere, or at least the illusion of such, and with it the movie tries to pull off timely twists. This is already a better effort than some horror films, but unfortunately the execution betrays all the buildup.

The use of jump scares is appalling, almost despicably so. Molly is also keen on spewing her meals unto unsuspecting victims. The effect and make up are not well done, they only manage to be disgusting and not in horrifying way. Perhaps, the worst is amalgamation of shifty production and overacting that makes some of supposed intense moments into awkward parody of itself.

Watching this is like watching devil spawn trying to be full-fledged demon. It almost does horror correctly, but eventually falls down like a kindergarten kid tripping over his bike and puke all over the place. Then again, one can't help but to give some merit or leniency to the effort and buildup.

Wasn't that bad.

[itsmeHeatherC23 · 5/10 · 30 June 2016]

I remember watching the haunting of Molly Hartley years ago, which was alright and me being me I had to give this movie a shot. It was pretty good up until like the last minute which was a typical ending for this type of movie. Now it had its moments of originality but a lot of scenes made me think The Exorcist, green vomit stains around the mouth, the discoloration of her face, letters forming on the skin then it disappears,the breaking of the restraints and rising above a bed. This movie was not bad but not good either. To me this movie wasn't that scary and kind of predictable, but it still had some interesting scenes. I thought it was kind of slow but had its moments for me to keep watching until the end. I gave this movie a 5 out of 10 rating because like I said it wasn't absolutely horrible but not a terrifying exorcism movie

Almost very good

[tmdarby · 6/10 · 2 November 2015]

I found it to be a pretty good exorcism movie actually. The scenes were very creepy. The acting was quite good. There were only two things that kind of ruined the movie for me. The first was the choice of actor for the exorcist. They would have been better off picking an average looking Joe. Instead we get super model, chiseled, father sexy stubble.

The second and worst part was the ending. I'll be honest, the ending was just plain terrible. They had a great twist going and somehow just said to heck with it when writing the screen play. The ending had scenes that made little sense in how they developed, and the writers apparently were just tired of writing the movie.

Terrible acting, terrible plot holes, just terrible.

[twhit-91475 · 1/10 · 22 November 2015]

I created an account just to express my dissatisfaction with this sad excuse for cinema. First, the acting is horrendous and in the best attempts it feels forced like watching a bad play at my kids school. Second, this movie has more plot holes than every story assigned to and written by middle-school students worldwide. Third, it's just lazy.

{SPOILERS} The writers made a LOT of assumptions and did no research: 1.) How does a priest find himself in prison after a failed exorcism? Yes someone died, but from an outside perspective there is absolutely nothing he could be charged with that a prosecutor would attempt to bring to trial. 2.) Molly was left unbound after being convicted *(assumed never actually confirmed)as a murderer who is a danger to herself and others. Any actual psychiatric facility would have had the crazy in a straight jacket and padded room immediately. 3.) Why is the only padded room outside of the woman's ward and through the opposite end of the men's ward? 4.) This line "Does my file tell you that my parents were also into the occult?" 5.) And then this line "I'm not insane, Dr. Hawthorne. I'm possessed." 6.) As for the ending well it seems that Matt Venne just got sick of putting this drivel on paper and rushed out the details for a convoluted, nonsensical, plot hole finally. {END SPOILERS}

In a sentence, this lazy sequel borrowed(without research) more than it offered.

Absolute dreck

[sploogemaster · 9 July 2016]

This movie is awful, hilarious, but awful. Never have I seen such a cliché film, this movie tries so hard to be scary but in doing so it does the complete opposite. This movie is hilarious though, the amount of "scares" that are directly ripped off of other movies in the genre are absolutely astounding. If you have seen any horror movie about exorcisms you have seen this movie there are so many better versions of this exact movie. I have no idea what the director was thinking when he made this rubbish but he seriously needs to consider a different profession. Despite what I've said I would actually recommend this movie (not as a horror) because it is so funny. Drinking game idea: Every time a horror cliché or something directly from another movie, take a shot. Warning: You'll be dead by the time the movie ends.

Molly, you in danger girl........again....

[FlashCallahan · 2/10 · 4 January 2016]

The unholy demon inside the titular character is apparently alive and well.

Six years after graduating high school, and discovering that a secret pact assigned her soul to the devil, Molly is suspected of murdering the only reason why this should be unrated and confined to a mental hospital, where she wreaks supernatural havoc on the staff and patients.

Her only hope is an exorcism by a defrocked priest, who has seen The Exorcist a few times, looking to redeem himself and save Molly's life before her transformation is complete........

In the world of most pointless sequels, this has to be up there with the likes of 8mm 2, and Single White Female 2, but at least this tries to have some sort of connection to the first movie, rather than cashing in on a successful film (but the first wasn't exactly a blockbuster)....

And from the upstart, it's pretty clear that it's film making at its most laziest, ripping off almost every exorcist/satanic cult related movie from Rosemary's Baby, The setting of The third Exorcist, and a blatant rip off of the Finale of original Exorcist, which is just so cheeky, it's deserves an extra star for its own cockiness.

But then it just shows you that the film has nothing new to offer in the plethora of straight to Blu Ray horror films that plague our market every single week of the year for the rest of our lives.

The most notable thing about this film is Devon Sawa, that chap from Final Destination, who now looks like Daniel Craig, but if he was inside out.

He looks so uninvolved in the film, and could win the award for least convincing Exorcist in a movie.

The first one was bad, but it was laughably bad, something you could point at and laugh at its misfortunes.

This however, is a pitiful excuse of a movie, and it angers me that I wasted precious minutes enduring it....

The Industry Shills have been out in force.....

[jackstupidjack · 1/10 · 4 November 2015]

Judging from the number of fake reviews here already (come on IMDb, sort it out), it looks as though 20th Century Fox have got their interns rattling out fake shill reviews to try and make a few dollars out of this tripe. While marginally better than the first Molly Hartley film, this one is still pretty much in the 'utter nonsense' category. The storyline is below weak; preposterously stupid in the most part, the acting is simply dire. I felt offended that anyone would release this garbage for viewing by the public at large. The 'acting' is absolutely shocking. I doubt any of the cast would make it into a High School play let alone (one hopes) another film. As a horror fan I get to watch a lot of bilge, and this one is near the very bottom of the pile. Best avoided. I look forward to exorcising this rubbish from my Hard drive.

One of the Worst Horror movies ever. I mean...ever.

[h-gaitherbrandenburg · 1/10 · 27 April 2016]

This movie was horrible, but hilarious. If the writers had just taken a few steps further into the "ether of hilarity" they could have wound up with the "Evil Dead," instead of this tripe. The sheer lack of knowledge that any of these writer's actually has about the Catholic church or demons makes it funny to begin with.

For starters, no priest would be cast out because the host died during an exorcism. He wouldn't be sent to jail, or prison, or hell--lol. Secondly, an upside down cross in Catholicism actually means you follow St. Stephen the martyr, who was crucified upside down out of reverence for Christ's crucifixion, there's actually nothing Satanic at all about an upside down cross. I could go on with all the terrible plot holes and plot writing in this film, but really, it would take me five hours and five pages to write it all down.

Just don't bother with this film, as the acting is as terrible as the writing. What kind of cops actually show up 8 hours AFTER someone called to say that screaming was heard in the apartment? What girl, having just committed mass murder of two dear friends, is just gently escorted into an asylum with no serious restraint? No demon is going to say, "hey baby, want to have intercourse" while it's in a host body that's all slimy and puked on etc... Give Satan a little credit for taste, at least.

If these producers had just bothered to take the stupidity of this movie and turn it into "hilarity" by tweaking the lines a little (not even that much) they could have had an excellent horror-comedy on their hands. That I would have loved to watch, but this film is laughable only because it's just that terrible. Save your $, don't watch this piece of tripe.

Excitement to Disappointment

[rayzor-48900 · 3/10 · 4 August 2016]

Let me keep this short with minimum spoilers. Here is a summary of why this movie went downhill halfway through the film.

1. The movie started out great with the whole possession scene. The makeup was good and the scene had a tense atmosphere.

2. Went to kind of Okay in the middle where Molly gets locked in the padded cell. The makeup degraded in terms of quality from the first possession scene. The CGI bug/insect was not top-notch and felt unnecessary to me.

3. Ended with Wow that was lame with the whole occult scene. The Chaplain being leader of an occult (oh, come on!) was ridiculous. And who were the random occult members who just showed up at the end? It boggles the mind.

So, to sum it up, this movie had the potential to be 7 stars or more had it been executed better with a few tweaks in the story-line here and there. But instead ended up like Jaws 3D, lame and soon to be forgotten.

Decent Exorcism chills.

[parry_na · 7/10 · 4 March 2020]

In this sequel to 2008's 'The Haunting of Molly Hartley', here the unfortunate girl not only continues to be assailed by demonic power, but has had a face and body transplant too. Now she is played by Sarah Lind, who makes a valiant stab at all the unpleasant requirements a host body for dark forces demands.

The problem with any film with the word 'exorcism' in the title is that the audience can be fairly certain whet they're in for: green vomit, outbursts of blasphemy, a priest whose belief is tested and a young girl being manipulated by a gravelly voiced demon. This gives reviewers ample opportunity to enjoy spotting references to/from other such films, just in the way that a zombie film will obviously feature a host of the shambling dead being shot at whilst trying to devour handsome heroes. Problem is, you can do a lot within the zombie premise (I'm using this as an example - I could also have picked vampires and werewolves to illustrate the point), whereas the theme of exorcism is far more limited. Unless the filmmaker is willing to take huge risks and possibly disappointing viewers who have come to see traditional exorcism antics, we get films like this - and still the audience complains, because there is nothing new here. It is very difficult to get right.

While there is not much progression - one moment Molly is her normal, effortlessly perfect-looking self, the next she is a fully made-up demon - puke, words written under her skin, young female host body rising from her bed, and repeated 'spirit commands you' lines from the ex-priest, are all featured here, bringing back fond memories of 1973's pioneering 'The Exorcist'. Whilst none of these echo the raw shock value of that ground-breaker, there are a lot of new scares too. And a whole raft of false endings that make your head whirl.

I would say this is a good entry into the genre. It mixes old chills with new and provides something which has an identity of its own, rare for these kind of films. My score is 7 out of 10.

Common Trash

[workshop-226-743561 · 2/10 · 1 March 2018]

This is one of them procedural horror flicks full of actors you've never seen before and will never see again. Seeming cast for there looks rather than their abilities it has that feel of a Showtime "After Dark" soft porn.

I love horror flick and am always tempted by the thumbnails but can always tell in the first 10 minutes by the horrible lighting, writing and acting that is's "one of those" horror movies. If you know what I'm talking about then you know exactly what this movie is like.

Getting tired of reading fake reviews on IMDb? Consider this genuine piece of information.

[narinnn · 9/10 · 11 October 2015]

This movie was the biggest visual masterpiece out of any horror of 2015. Hands down. Also up there for best horror of 2015 as well. The cinematography and sound works well to immerse you in this atmosphere, capturing the madness behind Molly's possession.

A definite trip worth the time to watch. It will not disappoint and I don't know what users have to gain from not giving credit where it is due. Should be much higher rated on IMDb.

This is a horror revival of the things that most directors are forgetting in a horror movie these days. And it wasn't even hyped up as the other movies out there which turned out to be huge disappointment like "Anabelle" and "Insidious Chapter 3." This one actually has flair, substance and appeal to true horror fans.

Trust me, it will take you back to your 1970s The Exorcist days.

Generous 7

[tabish_ronan · 7/10 · 8 October 2015]

It's a sequel to the haunting in Molly... and that movie was more teen audience based, this is where the movie makers took the critique and molded it into a better second movie. One of the few horror movies which the sequel is better than the first. It was mainly an OK film. The way it began I doubted it would be. It picked up though. If you are into exorcisms as I am you will like this. The most unconvincing was the female lead actor. she didn't have the gravitas or the chops for the role. Devon Sawa justified his role as a priest. Just my opinion. Is it me or did the ending point to another exorcism in a future film? I'm giving it a generous 7out of 10.

***Terrible***

[the_nephilim71 · 1/10 · 26 October 2018]

This is a complete trainwreck of a movie. Everything that was good about The Haunting of Molly Hartley is gone in this dud of a movie. I couldn't even finish it and I finished Show Girls. Don't bother with this sequel and just consider the first one the one and only.

bad plot, pointless, tried way to hard for plot twist

[alexandrakinsey · 2/10 · 18 June 2020]

Me and my friend love scary movies, this was such a disappointment it was more disturbing then scary. the makeup was really good. this was a really bad plot though. ending was so dumb, it was funny. some good actors, some bad. a little confusing, had to pause the movie to recap what happened and try to understand. it tried way to hard to be scary that we were laughing. we've watched both the conjurings, the nun, amittyville horror, the boy, the exorcism of emily rose, and many more this by far the worst movie out of all of them. If you like disturbing movies, this movie would be good for you. Me and my friend were eating while watching this and it was so gross and disturbing that we couldn't eat anymore. Which could be both a good and a bad thing. The makeup was so amazing that that's one of the reasons why it has 2 stars, and the other star is just for the effort put into making the movie a little scary. Actually scrap that the other star was for the guy that got stabbed in the head with the scissors, his face was priceless 😹. But overall if your looking for a disturbing movie, this ones for you, but if your looking for a scary movie, don't even watch the trailer you'll be disappointed.

Exorcise Your Demons

[cliometrician · 5/10 · 14 October 2015]

I think I'm a little like Coleridge's Ancient Mariner--I'm compelled to see every single exorcism movie, no matter how bad the reviews, then tell the story of the movie to strangers. I saw this film one day after I watched THE VATICAN TAPES, so my mind kept comparing the two.

In every exorcism movie there are elements that are common to most of them. In this case we have the beautiful girl that is possessed. Now there was a HAUNTING OF MOLLIE HARTELEY movie, but I never saw it. That may explain why there is almost no background for the main character and not much reason why we should care for her. The film has her out with friends celebrating her 24th birthday, and the fact that she just made partner in a law firm--youngest ever to do so. But she takes a pill offered to her by a guy and girl and her friends are forgotten, then she heads to her apartment still stoned and shares a bed with her two new acquaintances.

Then bad things happen and she winds up at a psychiatric hospital run by the Catholic church. The next trope is the kindly priest found in all such films. Except this one has been confined to the hospital as a patient. He assisted in a botched exorcism (which we see earlier). He would have go to prison except that he pleaded insanity in order to be committed.

And there the plot thickens with his attempt at another exorcism, this time at the behest of the resident psychiatrist. Now to the heart of things, the actual exorcism. He did not read from any manual as he confronts the demon hidden within the girl, just shouted out what he thought was needed, and it did not sound very convincing to me--he needed more rehearsals.

The make-up is well done and the special effects are average. I liked the make-up better than in the VATICAN TAPES. Then he pulled out something a little different, an old metal box that opens and is used to trap the demon. It was not called a Dybbuk as we saw in THE POSSESSION. I could not make out clearly its name but it sounded sort of like "cushian." Demon exorcised, everyone happy.....except the Devil's not finished yet and we have a surprise for us, a pretty dramatic one, and yet the drama fizzled and left the ending weak.

I would recommend this to anyone who is into exorcism movies as I am. Sure its familiar, but nowadays aren't they all? I put this a notch or so below THE VATICAN TAPES, mostly because that movie did a far better job on setting the background of everyone, and because that movie involved the Anti-Christ itself, something usually absent in such films.

Slightly better than the first, still unworthy.

[nitzanhavoc · 5/10 · 29 March 2016]

Even though the first film (The Haunting of Molly Hartley) had disappointed me (to say the least), I still decided to give the sequel a shot, mostly due to my understanding that it would involve demonic possessions and exorcisms, which make for a good plot and a fine scare when done right. After watching it, all I can say is that I'm glad I've given it a shot, but only because I've made sure to really lower my expectations.

The story line is pretty decent, if a little corny and tacky. All grown up and celebrating her 24th birthday, Molly (Sarah Lind, a fine actress given bad instructions by an obviously mediocre director) secretly awaits the conclusion of her destiny - to give birth to Satan. To her aid come Laurie Hawthorne (Gina Holden), her doctor at the mental institution, and John Barrow (Devon Sawa), a former priest stripped of his authority after an error of judgment in his previous exorcism cause the death of his fellow priest and the possessed woman. Consumed by guilt and regret, Barlow hopes to salvage his soul by helping Molly.

Besides the story, decent acting and pretty good characters - everything else is the same let down I've grown to expect after the first film. Director Steven R. Monroe has taken screenwriter Matt Venne's good enough story and botched it with blunt and preposterous overacting, attempting to achieve a dramatic effect but failing. Both Molly and Barrow are overly melodramatic, with dialogues and monologues resembling fan-fiction written by an enthusiastic junior- high fan-girl. Absolutely nothing about the film original, and some scenes seem to have shamelessly stolen (flies and vomit from The Exorcism, the twisted crawling on all fours from The Ring/Ringu, and the hidden antagonist from The Last Exorcism, for instance). And then, of course, the completely unnecessary nudity and sex scene in the beginning... Any Horror film using that pathetic cheat is not to be taken seriously unless other aspects of it are a total divine masterpiece, which is not nearly the case for The Exorcism of Molly Hartley.

All in all, anything and everything that makes for a good exorcism film is stolen (and no, not in the way of tribute and homage, simply in the way of "I got nothing, let's steal it"). This includes the forced plot twist. Am I glad I've given this film a chance? Yes (as it's quite entertaining if one expects it to be terrible). Have I been pleasantly surprised? Absolutely not. Still beats the first film, but hardly.

Really sad

[Edvis-1997 · 3/10 · 10 June 2018]

It wasn't bad film from the beginning despite it's bad visuals. But the ending part about Satanism it was hideous. Was thinking to give 5 but now it's only 3 maximum.

Canadians

[lionking8142002 · 5/10 · 26 October 2019]

So many Canadians actors in this movie. They only told them or they only wanted hire those? What's the secret? This possession happened in Canada?

My Review Of "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley"

[ASouthernHorrorFan · 7/10 · 13 October 2015]

Matt Venne is the writer behind "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley" and he does a nice job respecting the first film's story line. He picks up on the established mythos surrounding Molly's fated pack with Satan. Where the first film was good at masking the true story behind a playful haunting of a emotionally troubled high school girl, Venne exploits the demonic aspect to create a familiar, and obvious story line that pulls from all the possession lore available. It does, at times seem too cookie-cutter and expected, but "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley" maintains the initial "truth" of Molly's situation established in the first film so I actually enjoyed watching this all play out.

The cast and directing are stellar, both Lind and Sawa give great performances, Lind as Hartley-a victim of circumstance, and Sawa as her savior-who is also soiled by his dealings with the devil as a "failed" exorcist searching for redemption. It all could have been too hokey, redundant, or too contrived, but with Venne's script and Monroe's steady direction, "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley" manages an enjoyable, creepy possession flick. Of course I love pretty much any film or story that revolves around exorcisms and demonic possession-next to Satanic cult horror-it is one of the few Christian themes I do enjoy in pop-lore.

The special effects stay a steady blend of CGI and practical effects magic. The CGI is done with consideration to how "real" it will look on film so I didn't mind it. It actually works well here, plus there is enough practical, visceral stuff in "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley" that I have to give props to the FX department. And I always enjoy seeing the creature make-up effects when creating the demon face of the possessed. Even if it all just looks so "Reagan- esque". The soundtrack and musical score are the expected creepy tones, and even though it isn't original, it isn't disposable.

Overall "The Exorcism Of Molly Hartley" gives a nice demonic possession story with a solid story arc, it does seem a bit familiar-there are moments when it falls into the overplayed themes scene in these types of horror films. But-that being said-the movie has a nice devil cult aspect added to it when gives the ending a nice dark ending filled with both the spectacle and the flare of evil agenda that I enjoyed. There is one moment that is more laughable that thrilling-you will see it and know it-but most of the film stays serious, dark, and focused on the demonic fate of Molly Hartley in a more thrilling way than the first film.

We're here.

[nogodnomasters · 5/10 · 16 April 2018]

The film opens with an exorcism gone bad centering around the goof of Father John Barrow (Devon Sawa). He gets placed in a Catholic institute for the insane instead of prison, although I don't know what he was charged with. Subplot Molly Hartly (Sarah Lind) has her 24th birthday which climaxes in her criminal arrest and being evaluated at the same institute that contains John Barrow. Molly is possessed with the same pea soup spitting, elevating, ugly faced demon as Linda Blair who did get better and went on to make prison girl films.

The film combines aspects of the original "Exorcist" film with "The Omen" and has it take place in a mental institution...and oh yea, it's a sequel to that other Molly Hartly thing. The film quality is slightly above a low budget indie. This is another "me too" film in an over crowded genre, that could have been better.

May have appeal to people who like to watch ugly preggo bondage. Not high on my kink list.

Guide: Sex and nudity ( Kate Yacula )

Above-average exorcism effort

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 8/10 · 6 April 2018]

Confined to a mental asylum, a troubled woman subjects a series of violent attacks and confrontations on the staff and patients within that slowly drives a former priest to conclude that she's possessed by a demonic being and must summon his faith to exorcise the creature out of her.

This ended up being a decent enough effort. Among its virtues is the fact that this one manages to effectively utilize it's rather chilling horror setups rather effectively. Although it's all quite obvious, the early exorcism attempt at the house which sets his later banishment into motion is an effective opener that gets this going on a strong note while the later incident at the apartment complex which leads to her incarceration is an enjoyable twist on conventions that plays off rather nicely. Helped along by the distorted, demonic voices continually calling out or the sudden outbursts of supernatural activity that come as a sudden shock to the afflicted individual that continually force themselves along here, this one manages to set-up some convincing need for the later supernatural scenes. Once this moves into her at the asylum, the supernatural situations here are far more enjoyable that enhance the need for something to be done against her. Starting with their initial encounter which results in the massive vomiting and supernatural attack that carries over into the numerous encounters inside her cell where she throws people across the room into the walls or causing strange encounters to the others at the facility that prove the tell-tale signs of possession. Once this goes into the actual exorcism, this one has a lot to actually like. Utilizing plenty of fine techniques to cleanse her while detailing the various methods she has to best him, the back-and-forth nature of their confrontation is long, engaging and rather fun. That it lasts for several rounds with both sides attempting to gain the upper hand which gives it a lot of fun that's far better than expected and really sells itself quite nicely. These here manage to make this enjoyable enough to overcome its minor issues. The main flaw on display here is the fact that the ending is completely out-of-bounds with the rest of the story and serves no connection to the rest of the film. It really seems to come in from another movie entirely as it's tacked on nature goes completely against anything that had been told before and is simply there to add to the running time with the exorcism accomplished long before the ending which causes this surprise setup to come out of nowhere in order to make it even longer. As well, it has a disturbingly low level of sleaze present for such a story which is a bit surprising in that the typically profane and over-the-top performances aren't found as they normally are here. The cliche nature of this might also be a problem for some, but otherwise, it's not all that bad.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Full Nudity, Language and a sex scene.

"An average movie, good for a one time watch"

[vishnu-dileep08 · 6/10 · 16 September 2017]

The movie is basically about a girl named Molly Hartley who gets possessed by a demon and a church father that comes to her aid.

When you see this movie you are going to think the same I thought I have seen all of this before. This movie had its thrills, suspense and chills. The exorcism was good. The beginning we may be like it's the same story again and again but it changes. The ending of the movie was unexpected and unpredictable. The actress who did Molly did a good job and not to forget the female doctor.

Yes and No I have mixed feelings in recommending this movie to anyone as I feel some might like it some might not.

Notable Acting

Sarah Lind

Gina Holden famous for her movies like Final destination 3, fantastic four, Saw 3d and many more.

My Rating 6/10

One of the worst exorcism films around

[prisgrace · 1/10 · 11 December 2021]

The first fifteen minutes are ridiculous. Then low budget porn. Pornhub would not approve. As for scary well thought out plot-lines-ha. As for talented actors/actresses-HA. This movie is a JOKE.

Very bad

[asalcewicz · 3/10 · 20 September 2020]

I love exorcism movies. This was so bad I came here to leave a review. It's pretty enough and a competently made film, but it's not entertaining, compelling, or scary. It's just bad and you can find many better things to do with ~100 minutes of your life