Who payed the critics

This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Dreadfully Boring

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Https://viewsfromahill.com/2018/02/22/foreign-countries-16-the-possession-of-joel-delaney-1972/

it is 2.30am now. before watching his i thought that "this movie is like the exorcist! COOL" well I ended up. "i wish i saw the room instead". this is a very very VERY boring movie with no redeeming quality. the story is so bad that a 10 year old can make up a much better one. just put some racism and pedophilia in a blender and thats it. I wonder how the guy who gave it a ten said "it is like the exorcist predecessor". this is not even a hack and slash movie. the exorcist is a million times better. this is plain ZERo.well not even close. it is also not "so bad it is awesome" movies. it is simply plain boring. there isn't even one cheap jump scare. this should not be classified in horror movies categories. even if you want to watch it like the room or troll 2 you won't find any enjoyment. the movie is about 90 minutes. until the last minutes there is NOTHING. just a worried women going here and there for more than 70 minutes!. this is not like those detective movies. also there is not even 1 single special effect. at least troll 2 HAD special effects. non here.it is just a 5 minute story stretched into 90 minutes. Warning. just skip this movie and watch anything else.

The Possession of Joel Delaney is interesting for the fact that it's a horror film starring Shirley Maclaine, but the interesting elements end there unfortunately. The film focuses on Maclaine's character and her brother Joel Delaney. Joel begins acting strangely after a phone call and she decides to take him in to help him get over it. However, strange events continue to occur and she soon discovers a link between her brother and a serial killer who terrorised the city years earlier. The film certainly could have been interested and indeed there are films with similar plots that are really good; but this one just doesn't have enough excitement and the fact that it's pretty much impossible to care for any of the main characters doesn't really help it. The plot takes in the idea of mixing two different cultures but it never really comes off, mostly because it's too hard to care about it. The acting is mostly lacklustre and even the central actress doesn't stand out, which is a shame considering she is the only interesting thing about the film. It drones on for about an hour and a half (seems like longer) and builds up to the ending, which is not interesting and rather distasteful. I have no problems with bad taste, but it just doesn't fit here and feels included only to provide a talking point. This is a film best left in obscurity!

This movie pushes an obvious agenda, and fails. It is supposed to be some kind of commentary on the conflict between traditional supernatural beliefs of immigrants and the cold superficial rationalism of urban secular America, and the gap between the upper and lower classes. But I didn't feel while watching it that the director had any real concern for these worthy subjects - he just wanted to scare the audience with cheap shocks and distasteful taboos, and those don't create a better horror movie than the usual run-of-the-mill slasher/exploitation. The reason why the horror movies of Cronenberg, Polanski, and Craven work so well is that their very-real sociological subtext is buried just under the surface - the director is one step ahead of the audience, and the audience feels disturbed and helpless but can't fathom why. Their movies don't feel the need to rub the audience's nose in it in every scene like this one does. In fact, it seems as if this movie is working from some master-list of taboo subjects to cover - so it can proudly put check marks next to incest, mental illness, drug abuse, classism, divorce, suicide, Latino stereotypes, child nudity, possibly homosexuality, and dog food consumption. Very much a product of its time - the early '70s, when better movies pushed the social boundaries to enhance rather than replace a strong storyline like this one does. The movie also just doesn't make sense. The sound is lousy, and the editing is simply bizarre - sometimes cross-cutting head shots of Shirley MacLaine with completely different facial expressions. There are unimportant scenes and subplots that don't belong in the movie, and many others that belong in it but inextricably aren't there (such as the entire backstory about Perry King's character - he seems to walk into the movie already half-crazy). Is there supposed to be an unexpressed incestuous relationship between Shirley MacLaine's character and her brother? Who cares? Are all the Puerto Ricans in NYC part of a creepy religious cult? Looks like it. With some of the most lazy direction I've ever seen in a big budget film, I really wonder whether the director wasn't on drugs or something. The one worthy scene in the movie is a "traditional" Puerto Rican exorcism with drums and dancing which forms a very different counterpoint to the Max Von Sydow scenes in "The Exorcist."