An insult to both Catholicism and Aheism

It's offensive to atheism, because the whole lesson of the story is to not be atheist. The main character is atheist (or at least agnostic) for the majority of the story. The only way he can defeat the demon is to no longer be atheist and to become theist/Catholic. The plot of this story is anti-Athiest in the same way the plot of The Grinch is anti-grumpiness or the plot of Cars is anti-selfishness.

In no way does a film that includes devout Christians (The Best Man Holiday, How Stella Got her Groove Back, they always pray at the end of F&F movies) an insult to atheism. In no way does a film in which Christianity is established truth an insult to atheism (What Dreams May Come, Bruce/Evan Almighty, Noah, Fallen, or even most demonic possession films).

Also a "catholic" priest worked as a consultant for the movie.
You can check Youtube for his interviews etc.

That's exactly why this is more damaging to Catholicism than the average demon possession movie. The movie tries to paint itself with an extra layer of authenticity. The more Catholicism is brought up in these type movies, the more damaging it is to the reputation of Catholicism. It associates the faith with a story that purely fantasy. It doesn't just make Catholicism look scary, it makes it look stupid.

I've had to explain to ignorant people, in real life, that Catholicism is a form of Christianity, that it actually predates most other forms of Christianity, that it isn't a cult of insane demon hunters, etc etc. Because the only places they ever remembered hearing about Catholicism is from these movies and from molestation scandals on the news.

Adequately explain properties of demonic possession? In what sense?
If you are interested you can research the topic yourself, but anyway that's like saying a movie about a cancer patient doesn't adequately explain the specifics of his illness.

It simply isn't part of the intented story, which is a personal tale of a Young seminarian etc. etc.

Yes. It should establish its own fictional properties (which it begins to do, to an unsatisfactory extant). Just as a movie about a superhero should establish that superhero's powers, and not make the audience look it up after the movie. Or pause the movie and look it up half way.

"The demon behaves with no clear motivation, and does things purely for the sake of elongating the run time and spooking the audience. "

Because a demon should? Because real demons do? Because you'd want him to... because why?

Any character should behave in a way that is somewhat consistent. Unless a character is specifically shown to be insane, there should be some motives behind their actions. It doesn't matter if they are humans, demons, aliens, ghosts, or talking dogs. They need to have motivation, or the story doesn't work.

We are given three hints, in the movie, as to what the goal of a demon is and why they do what they do.

1. "Demons are like burglars. They don't want you to know they are there. That's why they prefer it if nobody believed in them" ~ Father Lucas‏

This seems strongly contradicted by the demon's willingness to display it's mind reading powers/quasi-omniscience to Michael. There is an entire scene where the demon sits there and berates the Michael for not believing in him.

2. "When the devil has nothing better to do, he likes to rape his children" ~ Demon/Possessed teen‏

This actually seems somewhat reasonable. At least to the point where we can assume that the demon is simply bored, and fun screwing with people.

3. "Well, he took a life. That's what he wanted in the end anyway" ~ Father Lucas‏

That also seems unreasonable. If the demons/the devil only wanted to kill people, it seems like there would be much more efficient ways of doing so, with the amount of power they possess. They are shown with the ability to inflict inexplicable wounds onto the people they possess. They could simply jump into somebody and then slit their throat. They could possess somebody and just have them jump off a large building and get the job done in a day.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

The character was an atheist or agnostic mainly because as a young kid he was supposed to make peace with his mom dying as a 'will of God' no rhyme or reason.
However, I don't understand you taking a stance for atheists being offended. Why should they feel offended by something they clearly don't believe in? Makes no sense. Of you were to say lack of being politically correct, ok because we cater way too much for that silly term. But offended? Frankly they lost the right to feel offended by not believing. In other words : if there's nothing to believe, there is nothing that can offend or harm you.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

This is an error. The Catholic Church still does perform exorcisms, there are 14 exorcists in the U.S. In October of 2014 Pope Francis spoke to a convention of exorcists, I presume in Rome, and said their services are needed. No one who is not specially trained is allowed to perform exorcists, and they are rare. Most are found to be cases of mental illness; but not all.
I found the film to be realistic and frightening. Although it is unrealistic to think that a priest who is an exorcist could himself be possessed.
I generally avoid horror movies; the less room in our minds we give to Satan, the less power he has. But for sure he exists.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

That's not true actually, the Catholic Church still does exorcisms, in fact the priest Michael is based on was also a consultant and is an exorcist. He does say however that 90-95% of the calls he gets for exorcism is not due to demonic possession but rather medical or psychiatric reasons.

reply share

add reply

formatting help