Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

ThrillMessage There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

kuarinofu There is so much wrong with this movie I don't know where to start. There were warning sings though, the opening title says "INSPIRED by true events" not based on, which is clearly not a good sign. Then, without wasting any time, we jump straight into the story. No character introductions or mood-establishing shots, nothing. I thought they didn't want the movie to feel boring because it's too long, I checked the run time - almost 90 minutes. That was the moment when I realized I'm in trouble. In like the first 5 minutes our main character, a journalist, driven by a very bleak motivation we know nothing about yet (remember, no introduction), decides to go to Romania to investigate a crime based around exorcism (INSPIRED by the Tanacu Exorcism of 2005). Throughout the movie the main character just walks around, drives around and asks stupid questions to provide for more expository dialogue. There is no atmosphere or any sort of horror feel to this, no mystery. They way it is directed, lit and shot makes you feel like you're watching a bad commercial. It's so unoriginal and as much NOT SCARY as a movie can possibly be. After 70 minutes of wandering around while being subjected to non-scary scares (boring jumpscares, mostly) the movie finally decides it is time to end. A sort of climax comes and the big mystery is revealed which was never a mystery to begin with. 2 hard cuts and the movie just stops. Wow. The movie ended and here is what I can say about it:1. It feels heavily cut and re-edited, some scenes contradict each other and are out of order, some scenes are very noticeably split into two segments (like the talking scene with Sister Vaduva). The introduction and a better ending was probably cut out as well I assume.2. The director of photography is either in a relationship or is heavily obsessed with Sophie Cookson. Up to a 15% of the movie are close-ups of her face. She is a beautiful young lady, but there is really no need to focus this many shots on her face. They also introduce a lot of unnecessary nudity from Sophie Cookson. It really feels like they just wanted to see her naked or something, this is so wrong. In fact, if you google "Sophie Cookson nude" the first results you get will be from this movie (don't ask me why I did it), FOR SCIENCE!3. This has no story, no characters and thus no character arcs, no horror or scares, no interesting locations, no creative shots or setups, nothing.The only thing that didn't suck was probably the casting. Some of the supporting cast was in fact Romanian and felt somewhat believable.Why even bother with the "inspired by real events" thing? Just take pseudo-Romanian setting - mountains, small county, introduce us into Orthodox Christianity and try to defile it in front of us. So much can be done with this concept...Anyways, if you want to know more about the Tanacu Exorcism - watch Dupa dealuri (2012) instead.I rarely say this, but seriously, don't waste your time on this movie, it is not worth it.

lavatch In the bonus segment of the DVD version of "The Crucifixion," the director Xavier Gens discussed how he felt a deep "personal connection" after his first reading of the screenplay. In an exorcism film, that is a good sign that the result may be not only be a good thriller, but one with some genuine feeling. The director also mentioned that he wanted a film that would break tradition with the generic exorcism film that attempts only "to scare" the audience. Gens was successful in finding his voice and creating a cinematic world that focused on outdoor locations and inventive uses of light, as opposed to the conventional claustrophobic bedroom setting of most exorcism films.Inspired by the true story of the Tanacu exorcism in Romania in 2004, the film approaches this delicate subject from the perspective of an American reporter, who gets more deeply involved in the subject of exorcisms than she bargained for as a journalist.We see the drama unfold from the perspective of 23-year-old Nicole Rawlins, a nonbeliever, who has never come to terms with the death of her mother and the conflict she exacerbated with her devoutly religious mom. In investigating the death of a young nun, Sister Adelina Marinescu, and the priest facing murder charges for her death, Father Dimitru, Nicole becomes the main subject of drama in Tanacu. And the primary emotion that drives the film is Nicole abiding sense of personal guilt.From Bishop Gornik, Nicole learns about the four stages of demonic possession and the function of the exorcist, as the victim moves from (1) presence (the initial possession) to (2) breaking point (the victim's period of panic) to (3) clash (the ensuing battle of the Devil and the Lord) and (4) expulsion (the final triumph of God's will by casting out the demonic spirit from the body of the sinner). We learn in the film that "demons are everywhere, waiting for their opportunity." The opportunity that presents itself with the arrival of the journalist, setting the stage for the "transference" of the demon into a weak and vulnerable vessel such as Miss Rawlins. One of the key figures in the film is Fr. Anton, who will befriend the journalist as a kind of spiritual bodyguard, on call at all times to assist her with a spur-of-the-moment exorcism. Early in the film, the starting point for the possession of Sister Adelina was a sexual experience she had with a young cad. The film also implies a countervailing sexual tension between young Miss Rollins and Fr. Anton. Wow! Based on this film, it appears that sex plays a role in demonic possession theory!While "The Crucifixion" may not be a great film, there was some innovation in the creative idea of rain (as opposed to split pea soup) as the visual metaphor for the possession. The visual effects were creative and memorable, and there is a moving parable in the healing process of Miss Rawlins after the loss of her mother. At the close of the film, we learn that Fr. Dimitru and four nuns served seven years in prison for the death of Sister Adelina Marinescu. When he was released from the penitentiary, Fr. Dimitru went right back to performing exorcism in the second decade of the twenty-first century.

beorhhouse I would give this film a solid 10 if the jump scares weren't done to death in a zillion other films. I give it a 9 because not many Horror films give glory to God and end on a good note concerning the power of Jesus in our lives. Otherwise, I would have given it maybe a 5 or 6, but the pro-Christian angle is worth recognition, and really worth a watch for anyone who, like the protagonist, is struggling with trust (faith) in God. I hope this director continues forward with great filming and good storytelling as he relates the many diverse stories which have the ability to show the power of Christ in our dark world. It's not as dark as it was when Jesus was born thanks to him and his ever-growing light, but it's still dark, and we need him. Truth is, Jesus is all we have.

jakubbartoszkowalczyk Plot is boring and repetitive but the worst part is the way main character plays her role, she might be the weakest chain of this movie. Also, it is pretty unbelievable that all Romanians speak fluent English...(no ofence here, this just makes this movie strange to watch). If you seen more than 5 possession horrors you can skip this one, there's nothing new.