C.H Newell I saw the lower rating on this one, and I've already seen one other project by the same directors which I did not particularly enjoy a whole lot, so I didn't expect much going in. However, I got a big surprise. This was a really good documentary. It isn't very stylish, there's nothing too exciting visually going on, and I'm not a fan of re-enactments or anything like that. What it does have here is a lot of neat information about the true case that influenced William Peter Blatty's The Exorcist. A lot of people go in assuming they're going to almost see a step-by-step of how the story influenced Blatty, but it's not about him, or the movie- it's about the true case behind it all.I'm non-religious, completely. Yet there is something terribly creepy about the real case here. There is some terrifying stuff here when you sit and listen to it. They go into a lot of the backstory, including St. Vincent's hospital, et cetera, and you get a real sense of the history in all this. Things have been wrong a long time, it seems. I don't really believe in demons, ghosts, none of it- I'm sceptical (yes, I speak and write in true English, as I'm a Canadian), though I want to believe. I just need to see it to believe it. That being said, I didn't go into this documentary hoping to see evidence of ghosts or demons, I went into it wanting to know more about "The Haunted Boy", and where it all started.I gave this 8 out of 10. There is no style to this, it's not exciting to look at, but there's more to it than the look, it's all about the real story that's being investigated. At a few points we get to hear some of the audio from the exorcism of "The Haunted Boy", performed by Father William Bowdern, who himself suffered greatly after the event as well, and what we are able to hear is horrifying. The screams and the sounds which, presumably, come out of the young boy are blood curdling, and absolutely amazing in a horrifying sense. I'm not saying he was "possessed", but something was clearly not right, and the audio really put this over the top for me. A nice look at the real case. I could have done without the dramatizations and such, we've already seen William Friedkin's fantastic adaptation of Blatty's novel and countless other exorcism-based film. However, there was enough to really keep me interested, and I feel it's the best of the Booth Brothers I've seen yet, as opposed to the very lackluster Children of the Grave. I can't see how anybody could rate that awful 'documentary' any higher than this one. I recommend anyone interested in the real events behind Blatty's fictional novel check this out because despite what others say, there are some excellent things in here!

Manila Sampson unfortunately a good idea went completely down the drain. right from the beginning, the details unfolded in a very haphazard manner. The "actual footage" was replayed so many times and to be true didn't even seem relevant to the actual Maryland case. what bothered me the most was that they were many loop holes in the narrative. the owner of the building saying "welcome to hell", just exemplified a very poor script. It looked like people were told what they have to speak before. the only scene that intrigued me was the last scene, but again not executed well. they could have made a 45 minute documentary with the focus on their findings.

Joseph Cannon Stylistically, you can file this effort under "We have After Effects are we are NOT afraid to use it!" Yeah, there is a lot of eye candy. Lots of spooky sound effects and quick cuts and cool transitions. Lots of WHOOM and WHOOSH and FLASH.But none of it makes any sense. The Booth brothers have ZERO notion as to how to assemble their materials into a comprehensible, linear narrative.You'll see lots of talking heads, but the people interviewed are never allowed to say more than a line or two at a time -- because the film-makers presume that the audience has an attention span of three seconds. Consequently, we have no idea what the interview subjects are even talking about.We never know what year is under discussion. We have no idea as to who the main players are or how the events relate to each other.For example, the film-makers include many shots of modern-day people playing with ouija boards. But how does this relate to the events in Georgetown in the 1940s? We are frequently allowed to hear "real" exorcism sounds. The audience is led to believe that this audio comes from the Georgetown case. But it doesn't.I've read a great deal about this real-life case, yet even I had little idea as to what was going on in this movie. This so-called "documentary" devolves into such incomprehensible gobbledegook that I had to stop watching after about half an hour.Booth brothers, heed my advice: Take the After Effects OFF your system. Just get rid of it. Learn how to tell a story without it. Learn how to use straight cuts and classic dissolves. Learn how to assemble your work in chronological order.Have some faith in your audience. Just because YOU apparently spend your entire lives hopped up on meth and caffeine doesn't mean that your viewers are as itchy and twitchy as you are.Ultimately, the audience wants to become engrossed in a narrative. We want to be hooked. We don't want our eyeballs slammed continuously by "cool" images that don't have any relationship with each other.Also: If you want to be taken seriously, either don't appear on camera or cultivate a different look. You guys look like a couple of pimps from El Paso.

maryschroer I saw this movie earlier tonight (10/21/2010) at its world premiere in the Tivoli Theater in St. Louis, MO.It was very disappointing.Touted as a docudrama exploring the true history of the events that inspired William Blatty's 1971 book/1974 movie "The Exorcist", instead the audience was subjected to 90 minutes of the random meandering nonsense that happens when wannabe ghost hunters are given a camera and a budget.Divining rods... ouija boards... evps... ambiguous shadowy figures... digitally blurred faces speaking in electronically disguised voices... embarrassingly lame re-creations... erratic timelines... tiring repetitions... irrelevant sidetracks... an aggressively bad soundtrack... sigh...Viewers hoping for an illuminating exposé will have to settle for an incredibly frustrating lack of substance. This movie offered no coherent facts or details that would lead to a clearer understanding of what actually happened to this boy, who was involved, why, and what they actually did.I left the movie confused and knowing scarcely more about this case than I did when I arrived.