The Exorcism of Molly Hartley

please Hindi dubbed

The movie is basically about a girl named Molly Hartley who gets possessed by a demon and a church father that comes to her aid. When you see this movie you are going to think the same I thought I have seen all of this before. This movie had its thrills, suspense and chills. The exorcism was good. The beginning we may be like it's the same story again and again but it changes. The ending of the movie was unexpected and unpredictable. The actress who did Molly did a good job and not to forget the female doctor. Yes and No I have mixed feelings in recommending this movie to anyone as I feel some might like it some might not. Notable Acting Sarah Lind Gina Holden famous for her movies like Final destination 3, fantastic four, Saw 3d and many more. My Rating 6/10

A possession film better than expected and sustains interest. Molly Hartley(Sarah Lind)was possessed by a demon on the 18th birthday. In spite of her personal suffering, Molly was able to lead basically a successful life. Graduating from college early and making partner in a company at a young age close to her 24th birthday. Six years, six months and six days after her original haunting/possession, the pretty young woman suffers a total mental breakdown and placed in a mental hospital. Dr. Hawthorne(Gina Holden)witnesses proof of Molly's demonic possession and asks another patient, John Barrow(Devon Sawa), who is institutionalized following being defrocked of his priesthood for participating in a botched exorcism. Barrow in his personal search for redemption, decides to rid Miss Hartley of the evil spirit that has taken control over her. It seems that 20th Century Fox spent the majority of the budget on special effects, which by the way are graphic and at times pretty damn scary. Disturbing scenes with religious themed obscenities. Fallen priest versus the devil. Worth watching, but the finale goes flat with a confusing ending scene.

It wasn't bad film from the beginning despite it's bad visuals. But the ending part about Satanism it was hideous. Was thinking to give 5 but now it's only 3 maximum.

I like the Molly Hartley Haunting and Exorcism of" movies. I am a fan. Every now and again I'll watch one or the other for some light entertainment.

This is a complete trainwreck of a movie. Everything that was good about The Haunting of Molly Hartley is gone in this dud of a movie. I couldn't even finish it and I finished Show Girls. Don't bother with this sequel and just consider the first one the one and only.

Let me keep this short with minimum spoilers. Here is a summary of why this movie went downhill halfway through the film. 1. The movie started out great with the whole possession scene. The makeup was good and the scene had a tense atmosphere. 2. Went to kind of Okay in the middle where Molly gets locked in the padded cell. The makeup degraded in terms of quality from the first possession scene. The CGI bug/insect was not top-notch and felt unnecessary to me. 3. Ended with Wow that was lame with the whole occult scene. The Chaplain being leader of an occult (oh, come on!) was ridiculous. And who were the random occult members who just showed up at the end? It boggles the mind. So, to sum it up, this movie had the potential to be 7 stars or more had it been executed better with a few tweaks in the story-line here and there. But instead ended up like Jaws 3D, lame and soon to be forgotten.

I think I'm a little like Coleridge's Ancient Mariner--I'm compelled to see every single exorcism movie, no matter how bad the reviews, then tell the story of the movie to strangers. I saw this film one day after I watched THE VATICAN TAPES, so my mind kept comparing the two. In every exorcism movie there are elements that are common to most of them. In this case we have the beautiful girl that is possessed. Now there was a HAUNTING OF MOLLIE HARTELEY movie, but I never saw it. That may explain why there is almost no background for the main character and not much reason why we should care for her. The film has her out with friends celebrating her 24th birthday, and the fact that she just made partner in a law firm--youngest ever to do so. But she takes a pill offered to her by a guy and girl and her friends are forgotten, then she heads to her apartment still stoned and shares a bed with her two new acquaintances. Then bad things happen and she winds up at a psychiatric hospital run by the Catholic church. The next trope is the kindly priest found in all such films. Except this one has been confined to the hospital as a patient. He assisted in a botched exorcism (which we see earlier). He would have go to prison except that he pleaded insanity in order to be committed. And there the plot thickens with his attempt at another exorcism, this time at the behest of the resident psychiatrist. Now to the heart of things, the actual exorcism. He did not read from any manual as he confronts the demon hidden within the girl, just shouted out what he thought was needed, and it did not sound very convincing to me--he needed more rehearsals. The make-up is well done and the special effects are average. I liked the make-up better than in the VATICAN TAPES. Then he pulled out something a little different, an old metal box that opens and is used to trap the demon. It was not called a Dybbuk as we saw in THE POSSESSION. I could not make out clearly its name but it sounded sort of like "cushian." Demon exorcised, everyone happy.....except the Devil's not finished yet and we have a surprise for us, a pretty dramatic one, and yet the drama fizzled and left the ending weak. I would recommend this to anyone who is into exorcism movies as I am. Sure its familiar, but nowadays aren't they all? I put this a notch or so below THE VATICAN TAPES, mostly because that movie did a far better job on setting the background of everyone, and because that movie involved the Anti-Christ itself, something usually absent in such films.

This is one of them procedural horror flicks full of actors you've never seen before and will never see again. Seeming cast for there looks rather than their abilities it has that feel of a Showtime "After Dark" soft *. I love horror flick and am always tempted by the thumbnails but can always tell in the first 10 minutes by the horrible lighting, writing and acting that is's "one of those" horror movies. If you know what I'm talking about then you know exactly what this movie is like.

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.