From what I could see on sites such as Rotten Tomatoes, the critical consensus was not too favorable. Yet Roger Ebert thought it was a decent little film. After seeing it, so did I.
The scenario of this film was tailor-made for Anthony Hopkins. Could you imagine a better excuse for scenery-chewing and over-the-top carrying-on, other than demonic possession? So you can't complain about the overacting: the Devil made him do it. The demonically-possessed cannot be expected to turn in a subtle performance.
Hopkins did a perfectly fine job with the set up. And the rest of the cast was equally suitable for what they had to do.
It was good to see Rutger Hauer again, a totally remarkable and outstanding actor. He had a very limited role (maybe five minutes screen time total), enough to make me wish he worked more in current films. I miss him.
I have not read the book this film is supposedly based on. But I would assume that fidelity to it is not a major point. There was a lot of humanity and recognizable human emotions evident in this film, and I saw no indications that the film was intended to convert unbelievers. And it worked up to some very suspenseful situations. Which is just what a thriller should do.
This was another instance of Roman Catholic exorcism. There were seven "orders" or steps in becoming a priest. In that order, from minor to major: porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte, subdeacon, deacon and priest. This set of orders supposedly was instituted a millennium ago, or more. In more recent times, the "exorcist" order is virtually ceremonial. The actual current exorcists are specially appointed priests. But it makes you wonder: back in the Early Ages, the next step after reading the Bible at church services (being a "lector") was to cast out demons (being an "exorcist"). Was there a special need way back then? Such that the faithful could not wait for an ordained priest to intervene? We've also seen Protestant exorcism recently, in The Last Exorcism. I have no reason to believe that casting out demons is limited in any way to Roman Catholics. I think the next film begging to be made is a Jewish exorcism. Perhaps there is a Muslim equivalent as well.
I am not saying that you have to go out and see "The Rite" rite now in the cinema. I don't regret seeing it there. But when it becomes available in a form that you can enjoy at home, it would definitely be something worth while to watch.
The scenario of this film was tailor-made for Anthony Hopkins. Could you imagine a better excuse for scenery-chewing and over-the-top carrying-on, other than demonic possession? So you can't complain about the overacting: the Devil made him do it. The demonically-possessed cannot be expected to turn in a subtle performance.
Hopkins did a perfectly fine job with the set up. And the rest of the cast was equally suitable for what they had to do.
It was good to see Rutger Hauer again, a totally remarkable and outstanding actor. He had a very limited role (maybe five minutes screen time total), enough to make me wish he worked more in current films. I miss him.
I have not read the book this film is supposedly based on. But I would assume that fidelity to it is not a major point. There was a lot of humanity and recognizable human emotions evident in this film, and I saw no indications that the film was intended to convert unbelievers. And it worked up to some very suspenseful situations. Which is just what a thriller should do.
This was another instance of Roman Catholic exorcism. There were seven "orders" or steps in becoming a priest. In that order, from minor to major: porter, lector, exorcist, acolyte, subdeacon, deacon and priest. This set of orders supposedly was instituted a millennium ago, or more. In more recent times, the "exorcist" order is virtually ceremonial. The actual current exorcists are specially appointed priests. But it makes you wonder: back in the Early Ages, the next step after reading the Bible at church services (being a "lector") was to cast out demons (being an "exorcist"). Was there a special need way back then? Such that the faithful could not wait for an ordained priest to intervene? We've also seen Protestant exorcism recently, in The Last Exorcism. I have no reason to believe that casting out demons is limited in any way to Roman Catholics. I think the next film begging to be made is a Jewish exorcism. Perhaps there is a Muslim equivalent as well.
I am not saying that you have to go out and see "The Rite" rite now in the cinema. I don't regret seeing it there. But when it becomes available in a form that you can enjoy at home, it would definitely be something worth while to watch.