“Georgetown Exorcism” Criticism: An Unfortunate Turn on Property Issues

In 2023 Exorcist of the Pope, surprised. The film, based on the apparently true memoirs of Roman Diocese exorcist Gabriele Amorth (played by Russell Crowe), was an interesting combination. On the one hand, he raised the topic of property and took it to a new level of almost detective conspiracy. On the other hand, he had an extravagant sense of humor that turned the entire plot into a series of surprises. But what was most surprising – aside from Crowe’s character crossing Europe on a Vespa – was the success at the box office. There has also been renewed interest in the demonic possession genre.

But the film did something different. acceptable Georgetown exorcism, which was marooned in production no man’s land due to legal disputes, will be making its way to the big screen. The 2019 production, which was in the hands of Miramax, benefited from the success of Crowe’s previous film. So, the film has finally received a theatrical release. Moreover, it demonstrates an interesting synchronicity between the themes. Like Exorcism of the Popeexplores the themes of property and supernatural violence from an original perspective. But that’s where the similarities between both films end.

Georgetown exorcism He is solely interested in how possession is interpreted in an apparently real context. In fact, director Joshua John Miller—fun fact, he’s the son of Jason Miller, Karras’ father in 1976’s The Exorcist—explores this idea in terms of its physical reality. So he uses a premise that is interesting to say the least. Russell Crowe plays Anthony Miller, an actor who has one last chance to save his film career. And that’s what happens when you play an exorcist. And they do this at the worst moment of their addictions and inner monsters.

A good idea that could give more of itself

Of course, the effectiveness of the script, including the director’s, in many ways, in collaboration with M.A. Fortin, is based on meta-references. So its opening minutes are a nod to the great horror films, including The Exorcist, of course. The director knows that his bet is safe, so the script is built in detail. Anthony doesn’t believe in the supernatural. He’s not interested in it either. In fact, his participation in a horror film is simply accidental and the plot makes this clear.

This means that when symptoms of a supernatural event begin to appear, they are directly confused with one’s own experiences in the world of drugs or mental imbalance. In fact, one of the most interesting elements of the film is the hint, not entirely subtle, that Anthony Miller, played by Crowe, may be a fictionalized version of Jason Miller, the director’s father. Last, suffer from all types of drug-related illnesses and even mental problems.

An interesting argument that loses interest

Whether by chance or because the director explores this inevitable comparison, the first part of the film takes place in a place of discomfort. Particularly as Anthony struggles with his mind in a space where insanity seems to be a simple reaction to the symptoms he suffers from. The script uses a sense of disorientation and grief to give the character a sense of who is about to succumb to darkness. Whether it’s an overdose or something worse.

But the thought-provoking idea quickly fades into the background as the film abandons the originality of its premise and moves forward through more conventional territory. Georgetown exorcism, then becomes a curious – and not always effective – combination of supernatural films and a bolder world. But the latter does not advance anywhere, and seems to be the least important in the story. Anthony soon begins to exhibit all the usual symptoms of possession. emphasized and exaggerated to separate them from the romanticized idea of ​​cinema.

Or at least that’s the goal of the film, which turns his physical symptoms into the character’s long, twisted mental degradation. Once the meta-reference is forgotten, the film becomes a festival of screaming, vomiting, and convulsing without the plot being able to fully and clearly explain where it’s going or why it’s going in that direction. Which leaves the film without too many resources. moving towards its quick and predictable end.

Dumb conclusion

It is regrettable that Georgetown exorcism be less bright than you hinted. Especially wasting its resources on a cheap production that pays superficial homage to other older and better executed films. In its final stretch, the film only seems to repeat over-the-top and scandalous formulas, without any further connection to its opening minutes. We miss that the plot delved into filming – which it simply neglects without further explanation – and, above all, how the great themes of history remain up in the air.

In a hurry, with nothing to say and leaving aside what could have been a witty look at the terror of terror, Georgetown exorcism it stays halfway. But it’s much more frustrating by not respecting its own ideas and turning them into attractive hooks that go nowhere. As a result, the film becomes one of many. Something unfortunate when it promised the exact opposite.