Login
Plot: The Vatican's chief exorcist tackles a possession that proves a lot more relevant than expected, all the while the evolving church debates the need for his line of work.
It's safe to say that the bulk of exorcism movies after The Exorcist will always sit in its towering shadow (more often than not, at the furthest and coldest regions of it). It is a near fruitless task to try to take on the subject with the goal of coming up to that standard. That being said, there have been a variety of flicks that prove at the very least entertaining and, even occasionally, worthy of being in the same company as that lauded classic. This is not one such film.
Though it claims to be based on the real-life accounts of Father Gabriele Amorth (who, in life, served as the Vatican's chief exorcist), the film ends up being more of a hodge-podge of Hollywood cliches of the sub-genre. The Pope's Exorcist has little interest in giving any regard to the real life accounts of Amorth's life. Fair enough, not the first movie to take profound liberties with true life but, unfortunately, the heavily fictionalized version doesn't stand on its own, seemingly content to play it safe by repeating tropes ad nauseum while slathering on edgy theatrics to substitute for any potential eeriness. All this gradually amps up to culminate in a slop of CGI slush and blatant sequel baiting that leaves you numb. It also has this uncanny ability to get worse the more you chew on it. Sure, there are nuggets of ideas throughout that may have lead to something decent were the writing not so indescribably bland but their so fleeting that they might as well not be there.
The dialogue? Eye-rolling at times, transparently pandering at others, and cringe-inducing when it hurts the material the most. Which brings us to the possessed (portrayed by a combined performance of a child actor and a voiceover actor). As is to be expected in this type of picture, much of the goings-on center around exchanges between the exorcist and his subject and, because of that, any chance at glory is dashed. To say that the portrayal of the afflicted is bad is a severe understatement. To use the parlance of our times: "it's cringe". From the painfully dreadful dialogue, to the confounding use of a heavy British accent that goes away with no explanation, to the child actor's TikTok edgy-boi performance, there is absolutely nothing credulous or weighty about it and, because this suffers, so does the titular exorcist. If the heart of your subject matter fails, so will the whole of the flick. Plain and simple.
Though it claims to be based on the real-life accounts of Father Gabriele Amorth (who, in life, served as the Vatican's chief exorcist), the film ends up being more of a hodge-podge of Hollywood cliches of the sub-genre. The Pope's Exorcist has little interest in giving any regard to the real life accounts of Amorth's life. Fair enough, not the first movie to take profound liberties with true life but, unfortunately, the heavily fictionalized version doesn't stand on its own, seemingly content to play it safe by repeating tropes ad nauseum while slathering on edgy theatrics to substitute for any potential eeriness. All this gradually amps up to culminate in a slop of CGI slush and blatant sequel baiting that leaves you numb. It also has this uncanny ability to get worse the more you chew on it. Sure, there are nuggets of ideas throughout that may have lead to something decent were the writing not so indescribably bland but their so fleeting that they might as well not be there.
The dialogue? Eye-rolling at times, transparently pandering at others, and cringe-inducing when it hurts the material the most. Which brings us to the possessed (portrayed by a combined performance of a child actor and a voiceover actor). As is to be expected in this type of picture, much of the goings-on center around exchanges between the exorcist and his subject and, because of that, any chance at glory is dashed. To say that the portrayal of the afflicted is bad is a severe understatement. To use the parlance of our times: "it's cringe". From the painfully dreadful dialogue, to the confounding use of a heavy British accent that goes away with no explanation, to the child actor's TikTok edgy-boi performance, there is absolutely nothing credulous or weighty about it and, because this suffers, so does the titular exorcist. If the heart of your subject matter fails, so will the whole of the flick. Plain and simple.
About the eponymous exorcist...the only saving grace in this shambolic, bloated mess is Russel Crowe's Amorth, who is a tiny smidge more developed than the mass of generic characters that populate the flick. Crowe is clearly having fun with the role and, despite the poor material plays it pretty straight and with some personality. Would I recommend because of this? Alas, no. This is for Crowe completists only. A real shame as a dramatic interpretation of Amorth's experiences with such a capable actor could of been incredible. Don't get me wrong, I would of been 100% okay with a balls-to-the-wall, seedy horror version of things too but this ol' thang isn't that either. Instead, we get a goofy lil' guy going toe-to-toe with some crappy effects and, well, you can't keep that shit to yourself.
It's very evident that they were trying to lay the foundation for a Conjuring Universe style franchise with this. Both feature HEAVILY fictionalized versions of real people and purported events. Say what you will about the Conjuring films but they succeeds by approaching the material with a semblance of seriousness and showing their creation some respect. This flick, on the other hand, fails by relying on poor spectacle and an utter lack of desire to make something tense or entertaining... or entertaining... or substantial or...I could go on. Two out of ten...and those two points go to Russ.
