--Spoilers-- It was always my understanding that the mockumentary approach to film making was used to add a touch of realism. This film is far from realistic.
The shaky and sometimes unfocused camera is distracting, and can make it hard to tell what is happening. But it is also quite wrong for a supposedly professional documentary team. A backyard documentary made by a couple of teenagers for youtube would be filmed more professionally.
My biggest concern was the way exorcisms were represented. The preacher was a classic evangelical showman, of the character only seen in America. He was a fair representation of that peculiar type, though overacting. But his ministry and exorcisms were both represented as simply deceitful fakery. Hardly a fair image.
Exorcism is not simply a case of travelling the country shouting at "demons" and using hidden speakers and smoke generators. Any "exorcist" behaving like that would be exposed in a week. Even in America.
Odd that the last exorcism performed by Rev Cotton Marcus should be his only real one! Or was it? Marcus invented a demon, picking a page at random from his guidebook. And low and behold the "real" demon when it appears confirms that it is indeed Abalam, as the good rev had stated. Of course we know just as well as Marcus that that name was picked at random. Odd that Marcus should have chosen correctly. Was the Devil just playing his game? Or was this "real" demonic possession part of Marcus' performance - for the benefit of the film crew? Assuming the possession was "real", why does Marcus not react at all when he faces a genuine demonic possession? After all he had performed fake exorcisms for years, overtly denied the existence of demons and the devil. The real possession must have been a surprise, but he didn't show it.
The denouement when it comes was confused, and frankly ridiculous. I was not impressed with this film.
The shaky and sometimes unfocused camera is distracting, and can make it hard to tell what is happening. But it is also quite wrong for a supposedly professional documentary team. A backyard documentary made by a couple of teenagers for youtube would be filmed more professionally.
My biggest concern was the way exorcisms were represented. The preacher was a classic evangelical showman, of the character only seen in America. He was a fair representation of that peculiar type, though overacting. But his ministry and exorcisms were both represented as simply deceitful fakery. Hardly a fair image.
Exorcism is not simply a case of travelling the country shouting at "demons" and using hidden speakers and smoke generators. Any "exorcist" behaving like that would be exposed in a week. Even in America.
Odd that the last exorcism performed by Rev Cotton Marcus should be his only real one! Or was it? Marcus invented a demon, picking a page at random from his guidebook. And low and behold the "real" demon when it appears confirms that it is indeed Abalam, as the good rev had stated. Of course we know just as well as Marcus that that name was picked at random. Odd that Marcus should have chosen correctly. Was the Devil just playing his game? Or was this "real" demonic possession part of Marcus' performance - for the benefit of the film crew? Assuming the possession was "real", why does Marcus not react at all when he faces a genuine demonic possession? After all he had performed fake exorcisms for years, overtly denied the existence of demons and the devil. The real possession must have been a surprise, but he didn't show it.
The denouement when it comes was confused, and frankly ridiculous. I was not impressed with this film.