This is a joke right?


I'm at a loss. The first one was hands down one of the most jaw dropingly bad peices of crap eve. found footage film with expert editing (if the footage was found...who edited it?) and also had a musical score (was there an orchestra hiding behind the camera playing music the whole time?) and then at the end it turned out that SHE WAS NEVER POSESSED TO BEGIN WITH SO THERE WAS NO EXORCISM!!) and now we have this movie which has the lamest title ever. EVER! and it drops the "found footage" aspect and is treating her as actually possessed by demons which the first film stated she was not?!?!?!??! WTF?!?!?!?!?! this is a joke, and anyone who liked the first one has some SERIOUSLY low standards. THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE is a recent exorcist film that's actually great, and...you know.....HAS an exorcism in it. and an actual ending.

reply

Did you watch Part II?

reply

I also have a problem with the title...I know it's a sequel, but...the first movie was the LAST exorcism!

So this movie should be titled: "Opps, We Were Wrong -- This Time It's the Last Exorcism...Really I Swear."

reply


To be fair, the first film was called 'The Last Exorcism" because it was the last exorcism that THAT team was going to do & film.

And it was, as they all died.


"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush."

reply

to the op, congrats on not liking movies that are open ended. that just means you are like everyone else and shut your brain off. that or you need that religious aspect to feel good about it, or you jump with the crowd. if you wanna digest the same simpleton crap for all of eternity then that's fine, but sometimes other people like having a different spin on something. and you don't have to like it, but stop ruining it for those of us that won't drink the kool aid when its our turn. variety, it's called the spice of life

reply