Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

truenorth What is Friedkin praising Amorth for? The priest failed, plain and simple. If we are to go by this movie, this Catholic-style exorcism only made the woman worse. Makes one wonder if Catholics even really know the Bible, which clearly and unequivocally states that God is more powerful than Satan. Jesus did not have these elaborate rituals. With one word, demons obey Him. So if we're are to go by the Scriptures, the method the Catholic church uses is all ritual and produces zero results.

queenlightningmcqueen Only 20 minutes into this "documentary" and let me say... what a giant load of donkey doo doo.Using some kind of "demon" voice that should only be used by Hollywood for the average run of the mill horror film.Seriously people, don't waste your precious time on this piece of garbage. It will make you cringe so badly.

dsmcg OK, call me a skeptic, but if I taped someone speaking in dual voiced slightly delayed harmonics, that would be the key to the entire project right there. The title would be, Possession proof via audio recording of the voice of Satan! Instead, it goes without discussion or further interest. This could mean one thing; it's a fake. (It sounds exactly like the Satan voice you can buy with vocal effect units at any music store.) Why would he bury the lead? It serves one purpose; keep the believers believing, And that is all the audience you need when you are a charlatan. Meanwhile, those who know a bit about audio or are skeptics will immediately wonder what happened? How did that get skipped over? This is a much more crucial mystery because it needs to be solved before you can take the next step. Friedkin could have not only eliminated this question but sold the whole project on it! But he did not. Again, ask yourself why? The non-religious testimony is dismissive. The religious commenters are useless in this context of legitimizing. The whole thing is poorly made and embarrassing as a project for the director. Apologist involved are on record saying they saw early version pre-post and the voice was there. But would you really expect a charlatan to show it before he put the effect on. Again, extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. In this day and age, trusting a video tape is just not smart. The woman first found she had a problem during a mass and it coincidentally gets worse during an exorcism. This is presented as good evidence along with her brothers testimony. To wrap up he retells a story where he forgot to bring his camera... The voice now has additional lower pitched voices in addition to the already suspiciously altered voice to really drive it home, again without pointing out how unbelievably important that would be.

muitasannas Good material, bad movie. The lack of attention to basic crucial details such as audio quality is borderline disrespectful, this movie deserved a proper production. I mean...It's almost 2020. Even TV documentaries look and sound 20x better. However, I must acknowledge that the unsettling and raw nature of the theme is still pungent there, even in such a sloppy pic. Cristina's scenes and the questions the director made in the course of the 68min do indeed resonate.