Nitzan Havoc Even though the first film (The Haunting of Molly Hartley) had disappointed me (to say the least), I still decided to give the sequel a shot, mostly due to my understanding that it would involve demonic possessions and exorcisms, which make for a good plot and a fine scare when done right. After watching it, all I can say is that I'm glad I've given it a shot, but only because I've made sure to really lower my expectations.The story line is pretty decent, if a little corny and tacky. All grown up and celebrating her 24th birthday, Molly (Sarah Lind, a fine actress given bad instructions by an obviously mediocre director) secretly awaits the conclusion of her destiny - to give birth to Satan. To her aid come Laurie Hawthorne (Gina Holden), her doctor at the mental institution, and John Barrow (Devon Sawa), a former priest stripped of his authority after an error of judgment in his previous exorcism cause the death of his fellow priest and the possessed woman. Consumed by guilt and regret, Barlow hopes to salvage his soul by helping Molly.Besides the story, decent acting and pretty good characters - everything else is the same let down I've grown to expect after the first film. Director Steven R. Monroe has taken screenwriter Matt Venne's good enough story and botched it with blunt and preposterous overacting, attempting to achieve a dramatic effect but failing. Both Molly and Barrow are overly melodramatic, with dialogues and monologues resembling fan-fiction written by an enthusiastic junior- high fan-girl. Absolutely nothing about the film original, and some scenes seem to have shamelessly stolen (flies and vomit from The Exorcism, the twisted crawling on all fours from The Ring/Ringu, and the hidden antagonist from The Last Exorcism, for instance). And then, of course, the completely unnecessary nudity and sex scene in the beginning... Any Horror film using that pathetic cheat is not to be taken seriously unless other aspects of it are a total divine masterpiece, which is not nearly the case for The Exorcism of Molly Hartley.All in all, anything and everything that makes for a good exorcism film is stolen (and no, not in the way of tribute and homage, simply in the way of "I got nothing, let's steal it"). This includes the forced plot twist. Am I glad I've given this film a chance? Yes (as it's quite entertaining if one expects it to be terrible). Have I been pleasantly surprised? Absolutely not. Still beats the first film, but hardly.

FlashCallahan The unholy demon inside the titular character is apparently alive and well. Six years after graduating high school, and discovering that a secret pact assigned her soul to the devil, Molly is suspected of murdering the only reason why this should be unrated and confined to a mental hospital, where she wreaks supernatural havoc on the staff and patients. Her only hope is an exorcism by a defrocked priest, who has seen The Exorcist a few times, looking to redeem himself and save Molly's life before her transformation is complete........In the world of most pointless sequels, this has to be up there with the likes of 8mm 2, and Single White Female 2, but at least this tries to have some sort of connection to the first movie, rather than cashing in on a successful film (but the first wasn't exactly a blockbuster)....And from the upstart, it's pretty clear that it's film making at its most laziest, ripping off almost every exorcist/satanic cult related movie from Rosemary's Baby, The setting of The third Exorcist, and a blatant rip off of the Finale of original Exorcist, which is just so cheeky, it's deserves an extra star for its own cockiness.But then it just shows you that the film has nothing new to offer in the plethora of straight to Blu Ray horror films that plague our market every single week of the year for the rest of our lives.The most notable thing about this film is Devon Sawa, that chap from Final Destination, who now looks like Daniel Craig, but if he was inside out.He looks so uninvolved in the film, and could win the award for least convincing Exorcist in a movie.The first one was bad, but it was laughably bad, something you could point at and laugh at its misfortunes.This however, is a pitiful excuse of a movie, and it angers me that I wasted precious minutes enduring it....

tmdarby I found it to be a pretty good exorcism movie actually. The scenes were very creepy. The acting was quite good. There were only two things that kind of ruined the movie for me. The first was the choice of actor for the exorcist. They would have been better off picking an average looking Joe. Instead we get super model, chiseled, father sexy stubble. The second and worst part was the ending. I'll be honest, the ending was just plain terrible. They had a great twist going and somehow just said to heck with it when writing the screen play. The ending had scenes that made little sense in how they developed, and the writers apparently were just tired of writing the movie.

Narin Singh This movie was the biggest visual masterpiece out of any horror of 2015. Hands down. Also up there for best horror of 2015 as well. The cinematography and sound works well to immerse you in this atmosphere, capturing the madness behind Molly's possession.A definite trip worth the time to watch. It will not disappoint and I don't know what users have to gain from not giving credit where it is due. Should be much higher rated on IMDb.This is a horror revival of the things that most directors are forgetting in a horror movie these days. And it wasn't even hyped up as the other movies out there which turned out to be huge disappointment like "Anabelle" and "Insidious Chapter 3." This one actually has flair, substance and appeal to true horror fans.Trust me, it will take you back to your 1970s The Exorcist days.