The Pope's Exorcist

The Pope’s Exorcist starts out entertainingly with the character of an unconventional, rebellious priest interestingly portrayed by the great Russell Crow. And then it is all the more unentertaining due to its impetuous piling up of genre clichés in the final third, which is more ridiculous than scary or in any way impressive. The film’s best scene, with which the still watchable and still developing part of the storyline culminates, is somewhere around the midpoint. A mainstream movie powered by a stellar cast, but in the context of the genre, it’s a total fiasco in comparison with some cinematic delights that don’t even make it into local theaters (X, Pearl). (15/04/2023)

It's an interesting effort. The cast is quite enticing - I don't think Russell would play in any BS movie. The story is good, and the execution is also solid, although there are a few weaker moments. Overall, I consider it well-done. I never expect a cultural masterpiece from a horror movie, but rather a fun and relaxing experience, which is exactly what this provided. The fact that it is based on a real character and a "real" story of an exorcist adds to its appeal. I'm curious to know how many people ordered books by Amorth after watching the movie :) I would give it three stars, which is an above-average rating for this genre. (05/05/2023)

Russell Crowe was apparently bored in conventional roles, his Jekyll & Hyde in the failed Dark Universe didn't work out, so his overdone genre cravings had to end here. And in all fairness, he is also the only reason why this schematic routine with no suspense, no creative ideas and no horror atmosphere is worth watching. You can see that he enjoys his unusual role immensely, diversifying it with small details, and even his crazy Italian accent will amuse more than annoy you from the very first moment (partly because it is far from the worst accent in the film). The rest of the vacuum around Crowe, however, is sheer exorcism routine from a routine director, who can only be credited with at least not cramming in annoying jump scares with loud sound effects, which is otherwise the plague of contemporary horror films. (05/04/2023)

Russell Crowe, in his current chubby state, is already taking every stupid thing he can get his hands on. And yet, I liked the first half enough, as long as Russell is brimming with charisma and wit, and there's no shortage of some fine visual ideas. But as the minutes tick by, it gets sillier and more generic, and the final duel between the two priests, with bodies flying through the air, flames whipping and bloody women climbing out of iron maidens, looks like some kind of Mel Brooks parody. There's an art to fucking it up like that. Thanks for Franco Nero, I haven't seen him in anything in a long time. (24/10/2023)

Congratulations to the filmmakers for finding a meaningful reason to make the thousandth exorcism horror film with the potential for epic expansion into sequels. However, I won’t congratulate them for not being scared of their own idea, and without flinching, follow a template we’ve seen a thousand times before. A template entertaining and well executed enough to be worth watching, but a template nonetheless. Russell Crowe is very good, some of the visual effects and the generic demonic voice not so. (02/05/2023)