Written by Sam Clark 

Certificate: 15 

Running time: 98 minutes 

Director: David Midell 

*sighs* Here we go again, yet another exorcism film. Many, many, many people regard William Friedkin's 1973 horror masterpiece ''The Exorcist'' as not only the scariest film ever made, but one of the greatest films of all time. Granted, by today's ridiculous extreme standards, the film is remarkably tame. But back in '73, when audiences saw the film for the first time, the reaction was as outraged and extreme as you would expect (and want and hope). Reports of fainting, vomiting and, my own personal favourite, priests on standby to calm the terrified public. Ever since then, it's safe to say that the bar was set pretty high for exorcist themed horror cinema. The film, unsurprisingly, went on to spawn five more films and a TV show. Most of which even became iconic and memorable in their own rights, not necessarily for all the best reasons.

Since then, Hollywood has been getting it's hands on more and more ''true story'' cases, no matter how big, now matter how small and crucially, no matter the validity behind it. If it is alleged to have been true, you know what that means. I am honestly expecting a film about a possessed cat next. Fast forward to present day, when the notion of a new exorcist themed horror will barely register to most or even grab their interest (as the formula has surely run dry), we have ''The Ritual'' - a title so bland and generic that if that doesn't warn of the impending doom or the clear indicator that they have run out of ideas, I don't know what will.

Photo credit: Horror Movies Blog/ XYZ Films 

From co-writer and director David Midell and writer Enrico Natale, ''The Ritual'' is about...well...its basically just every other exorcism film you have ever seen ever. This is based on the true events of Emma Schmidt, whose exorcism in 1928 is one of the most heavily recorded and documented exorcism cases in American history. Can you hear that? That's the sound of YET another script being written about YET another true case that occurred. Dan Stevens plays ''Father Joseph Steiger'', who has personal problems he is fighting as well as trying to run his convent. Al Pacino is ''Father Theophilus Riesinger''.

The two must set aside their methods and differences and perform a series of exorcisms on Emma (Abigail Cowen) and save her from the demon, whilst at the same time attempting to overcome their own conflicts, both physical and psychological. Despite being a hardcore horror fan who loves to watch things that are genuinely, scary, creepy, disturbing etc., I still jump very easily, get creeped out and so on. I do not think I have ever been this bored in a cinema in my life, and for the first time in eighteen-years of going, I genuinely thought about going out to stretch my legs for a few minutes. I sincerely hope, from the bottom of my heart, that the director and writer never step foot near a horror film ever again.

What they think seems to constitute making something ''scary'' is to shake the camera as much as it is physically possible, to try and give you the illusion you are watching something vaguely approaching scary (I suspect they realised nothing was working). No, it is just ridiculously annoying and infuriating, making the experience of an awful horror film even worse than it already is. They have shot themselves in the foot in the worst fashion possible. 

Why this was not a streaming release, better yet a ''Shudder'' release, is beyond me. The amount of films I have seen that are released at home that should be in cinemas are many, and it baffles me that something like this is given the theatrical treatment over others. Granted, they have done well to get Al Pacino to do this, but what do you want? A pat on the back? That is clearly where most of the budget has gone, because I can tell you know, it did not go toward making a half-decent piece of horror. There was an even a couple of laughs in my screening, none of which were with the film, but at the film. 

I was hoping and praying (pun very much intended) for some gore, some splatter, some violence, some horror and some jumps to save me from this absolutely blurry drivel on screen. The ''scares'' are, without a doubt, the laziest I have ever seen, and a couple of moments towards the end bordered on parody. Pacino, with the best will in the world, looks and sounds like he has been dragged out of bed to do this, and even that is charitable. I do not want him to finish his legendary career by doing projects like these, an Oscar-winner and one of the greatest to ever do it, let's not forget. 

This is undoubtedly the worst I have ever seen from Dan Stevens, whose entire character trait and personality is to look shocked, surprised and existentially sad all throughout. You completely understand what they are going for and why, but to say it has spectacularly backfired is an understatement. He goes from intriguingly conflicted to distractingly cringe very quickly and he has about as much charisma as a damp sock. The film has a battle on it's hands as it is anyway, as the exorcism genre has no many options to choose from (plenty of which are poor as well), but even they are more rewarding than whatever pathetic excuse this is. If this is not the worst 2025 will have to offer, then pray for us...

In cinemas Friday 30th of May.