Why the hell is this rated 5.6/10

He/she probably doesn't like well made, original stories.....

this is far away from an original idea
or
a good movie
this was so boring... usually bad "horror" movies just make things really gross to keep people interested but these guys didnt even do that. sure in that gunfight there was like lots of blood and guts that was just a sad attempt. the movie tried to be all original and have twists and all that but it was just so pretentious you could tell they were going for that. the "twist" was prettyl ame at the end, and those scenes where there would be like flashbacks of some sort where it was supposed to "reveal" what wa happening did nothign at all. there were so many flaws. there are probably a few less than i saw because by the end i was bored to death but there are definetely flaws. did anyone else notice that the characters seemed to miss really important parts of what was happening around them. ex. "there's a book here"
not
"there's a book here COVERED IN BLOOD AND MAGICAL LANGUAGE"

or when that one guy comes down the stairs and the guy that got machete'd by the ghost is there, covered in blood, and OBVIOUSLy possessed. noone really cares that he is covered in blood.

this movie migth be scary to like 7 year olds.

..maybe

[deleted]

It contained jump scares, but i don't think the STORY relied on them - just the scares relied on them. The movie itself was more like an M. Night paced movie. Slow. Building. Yeah, some jump scared - but many of them worked and the movie would have been just as good without the jumps = therefore it isn't reliant on them at all. Your follow up: great atmosphere of impending doom defies your take that it relied on jump scares.

Sorry to be picky, but I myself typically HATE jump scares. I think they're cheap and easy. Yet, I know so many people that think that jumping is the essence of horror, and a movie isn't scary unless they jump a few times. Jumps are stupid. This movie had jumps, but I found them to be contextually fine. They were there equally to frighten the characters as they were to frighten us, rather than a crutch and a limitation to the scares. Many Friday the 13th movies fall back entirely on sudden Jason appearance and ax swings. In this movie most, if no ALL of the jumps were the characters hallucinations and/or visions. It worked. That, and the story was not reliant on them and the pacing of the movie built tremendous impending doom, as the previous poster stated.

I truly can't believe this hasn't scored higher. It's not a perfect movie. Its a little - but its NOT confusing at all in the way so many people on here seem to be confused (why the title, was the dog a demon, etc. WTF???). It's confusing because we don't get the whole back story, we're left to peice it together in very short quick jumbles. Either then, though, you can get enough of the picture to go with it. You know demon possessions are happening. Also many things were left completely unresolved... like we're only getting a slice of the story and not a whole, standard movie. I kind of liked that though, while still wondering what the hell certain scenes were intended to mean.

Not only that, its a first time director! Hell, many directors on their fourth films don't craft their films with as much care as this. Like it or love it, it was VERY well made. This director, at a bare minimum, is one to watch for in the future and this is an excellent movie, ESPECIALLY for a first effort.

Aside from jump cuts: i also don't particularly like exorcism or supernatural horror much either. Yet this film stuck with me. Very impressive.

why is anyone paying attention to this fatuous moron?

It was good, very inovative, I would give it a 7... And Nicki Aycox was great...

I thought this thread would be pondering why the film got such a high score.
3/10

[deleted]

I thought it was pretty good. Not amazing, but worth a 6 or 7. Decent acting and with only six real characters (one quickly disposed of), it's actual possible to develop them a bit and build a little sympathy for them (not easy, considering their first scene established them as murderous bank robbers).

The two main problems I had:
1. That really stupid late-movie death with the one guy getting screamed at by a demon and dissapating into mist. Cheap schlock compared to the rest of the movie. I've got no problem with "suspension of reality", but if the demons can play by those rules, the movie should have been over about 10 seconds after the six entered the house (or 10 seconds after nightfall, if you want to draw it out a bit). All you'd need is one of them popping up and screaming and BOOM! No one alive!

2. The whole thing with Clive (think that's the name — the one who was portrayed as the most villainous of the six) really played off kind of lame at the end. He sees his buddy Joseph and leaves.....and isn't seen again until William and Annabelle find him playing scarecrow. With the way the plot seemed to be developing a lot of tension between him and William, an off-screen capture leading to his eventual death seemed weak. At the very least, having a few demon mind-tricks getting played to cause William to blast him thinking he had the gold, only to find out he doesn't would be a bit more fitting.

Still, it was a fun, suspenseful movie that's a hell of a lot better than a lot of horror flicks I've seen.