Unrelated to Anthony Mann's western Devil's Doorway (1950), Aislinn Clarke's laudable debut feature, The Devil's Doorway, is rather a found-footage horror film. Taking its inspiration from the history of Magdalene Laundries in Ireland, specifically the Bon Secours Mother and Baby Home in Tuam, the film undeniable has its share of clichés, but overall it's an impressive piece of work, dealing in an interesting manner with a truly shameful part of Irish history.

One might think that nothing more horrific could be made of this subject than the actual facts of the case; after all, Peter Mullan's superb, but exceptionally disturbing, The Magdalene Sisters (2002) is a horror film in everything but name. However, what Clarke does in The Devil's Doorway is use the very real issues as the foundation for a socially conscious horror film which serves as a conduit for the anger felt throughout the country. In a Q&A after the film screened at Dublin's 2018 Horrorthon Festival, Clarke explained that the decision to make a horror movie about something so serious and important to the nation was because, "horror is good at unpacking social trauma", allowing a filmmaker "to metaphorically explore national pain." Far more concerned with the shifting moral positions of the two priests than it is with devils and demons or silly jump scares (although there are a few of these), the film thus functions as a kind of microcosmic allegory of Irish history; John (Ciaran Flynn) represents Ireland of the 1960s, innocent and blindly faithful, unwilling to believe anything negative about the Church, whilst Thomas (Lalor Roddy) represents the Ireland of today, jaded and disillusioned, spiritually cut off from ecclesiastical doctrine, scathing of Church dogma, and all too aware of the earthly sins committed in the name of Catholicism.

Reading between the lines of the horror tropes, this is a film about human evil - the primary story is not the investigation into the statues, it's the discovery that the institution has been discarding the bodies of dead children in a vast underground catacomb, with the full knowledge of the Holy See. Clarke, an atheist herself, is thus far more interested in showing the hypocrisy of the Church's culpability, condoning the torture of woman and the unsanctified burial of children, whilst it preached morality to the masses, warning of the esoteric dangers of contraception, the evils of homosexuality, and the iniquity of blasphemy. In her view, the evils perpetrated by the nuns against defenceless children are far more horrific and disturbing than anything a demon could unleash on the world. Looking at issues such as the illogicality of blind faith and the history of organised religions' tendency to marginalise women, often to the point of violating their human rights, Clarke exposes the Catholic Church's duplicity, laying bare their utterly contemptible and self-serving role in Irish history, and it's the anger and sincerity of this message that lingers far longer than any of the film's genre elements. The sympathy Clarke feels for these women and children is palpable throughout. Indeed, in 1997, Clarke herself had a son out of wedlock at age 17, and under different circumstances, could have ended up in a laundry. Thus, the film is intensely personal, as the entire Magdalene scandal should be for all Irish people over the age of 20.

One of the film's greatest strengths is Lalor Roddy's performance as Thomas. Playing the priest as cynical and disheartened, worn down by years of debunking claims of miracles, at least initially, he is far more interested in the treatment of the girls than the possibility that the statue's bleeding may be authentic. He's also no shill for the church, seen in lines such as, "this place disgusts me. The people who run this place disgust me," or when he describes Giuseppe Verdi's letter to Pope Pius XI asking for special dispensation to allow female singers to perform the Messa da Requiem. As the film goes on, Thomas becomes more and more angry about what is happening in the laundry, leading to one of the most thematically relevant and narratively justified f-bombs I've ever heard in a film. One of the film's primary themes is the hypocrisy of the Church, and the ugliness of organised religion in general, and this theme is carried primarily by Thomas. Roddy's layered interpretation of Thomas's existential crisis is the primary reason the film works so well in an emotional sense. Painfully aware that acceptance of dogma, faith in the Church, and belief in God are three very different things, Thomas finds it increasingly difficult to reconcile his genuine love for God with the practices the Church carry out in His name, with Roddy's performance adding a great deal of both emotional and esoteric complexity to the film.

Thomas isn't the only character to voice criticisms of the Church, however. In perhaps the film's key scene, when Thomas threatens to reveal to the bishop what's happening at the laundry, the Mother Superior (Helena Bereen) laughs, telling him he'd be surprised to learn how unsurprised the bishop is. She then launches her own attack on the Church, arguing that the nuns are used to do the Church's dirty work, with insufficient resources, and, when things go wrong, they must take the blame. An especially good line in this scene concerns the pregnancy of the women in the laundry, with Mother Superior rhetorically asking Thomas, "Do you know how many of the babies born here had fathers who were Fathers, Father?" Although a contemplable character, everything she says in this scene is relevant and pertinent to Clarke's overall message.

At Horrorthon 2018, Clarke was asked if there were any concerns regarding accusations of exploitation during the making of the film. She acknowledged there were, explaining that she remained very much aware during filming that many people who lived in the laundries are still alive today, and that maintaining the integrity of the women and children was paramount on her mind at all times. She also said she had heard from several Magdalene Survivors who had loved the film, and one woman in particular who travelled from Cork to Belfast to view it, giving an emotional endorsement when it was finished. Indeed, Clarke explained that the film was originally written to be set in 2018, with a group of urban explorers running afoul of eerie goings-on in an abandoned laundry, and it was only when she came on-board that it was relocated to the 1960s. She chose this period because it was during the 60s that the laundries were at the height of their powers. Believing that setting the film in 2018 and depicting urban explorers would have been disrespectful and exploitative (something like Chernobyl Diaries (2012)), Clarke felt that to relocate it to 1960 lent it an air of authenticity, whilst also allowing her to deal head-on with the moral issues thrown up by the scandal.

Aesthetically, the film is also interesting, managing to sidestep many of the inherent problems with found-footage films. For example, the fact that it's set in 1960 means it's shot on 16mm rather than VHS or hi-def. The 1.37:1 Academy Ratio, complete with rounded corners, has the effect of making Ryan Kernaghan's carefully composed images look like historic photographs. The shaky and imperfect footage also gives the film a sense of an old cinema verité-style documentary, with the amount of artefacts helping to sell the first-person immediacy of the cinematography - lens flares and burn-outs are especially common, and the handheld nature of the filming has a suitably disorienting effect. Granted, John's Bolex camera manages to pick up far more detail in dark locations than would be possible with only a single bulb as illumination, but this is a relatively minor gripe when the overall look is so good. This point also nicely illustrates the avoidance of another pitfall of found-footage horror films - why the hell don't they drop the camera and get out of dodge. A problem in many such films, here, the answer is simple - in many scenes, the camera is providing the only source of light, hence why John keeps it turned on and filming.

Also worthy of praise is the sound design, which, as with the cinematography, manages to avoid a bugbear of found-footage films - pitch-perfect sound irrespective of location and people's distance from the camera. Here, there are multiple examples of dialogue being muffled when spoken away from camera. It's a very simple touch, but it adds a nice air of verisimilitude to proceedings.

Of course, the film isn't perfect. As the latest in a long line of found-footage exorcism/possession horror movies, the crowded nature of the subgenre, and the general lack of quality of the films, doesn't do it any favours. Additionally, especially as it nears its climax, it regurgitates a number of genre clichés - floating beds, upside down crucifixes, scary nuns, creepy kids, creepy dolls, skeletons, underground caverns, jump scares which don't make a great deal of practical sense. Falling back a little too much on the generic conventions it has managed to avoid until the last half hour or so, in this sense, the film ultimately plays it disappointingly safe.

However, all things considered, this is an excellent piece of work, and an accomplished debut. It looks amazing, and is far better than the majority of found-footage movies, arguably the best such film since The Blair Witch Project (1999). The acting is terrific, and it's properly creepy in places. Perhaps most importantly, however, if you can look past the hokum and the genre markers, you'll find a socially conscious film engaging with a painful national scandal.

From the first i saw how it movie setting at 1960 with found footage style i'm rather skeptic how it will going like another trash footage horror movie style, but really this movie give me goosebumps, acting are very natural, and special effect is good even is just simple, but it really works to make you wanna shut your eyes, i don't know why this movie have such a low rate, its unfair, people nowdays just hate horror genre for sake of horror, just watch it. I recommend it.

The devils doorway may have a mediocre IMDB rating but do not take this horror film from the UK to be just an average scary movie because it's not. The acting in this feature is purely amazing and the storyline may not be the most original but writers have creative privilege and they can always refresh our memories if they so choose. And although "The Devil's Doorway" does have 2 or 3 jump scares over the limit the dialogue keeps you entertained while you wait for the actual occurrences to take place and yes regardless of what the advertising banner for this movie says this is found footage and it's a pretty darn good one. The camera has a few jiggly moments at the end of the movie but 95% of it was was steady and well angled. Special effects were decent and the camera editing was converted into the look of a retro 35mm camera giving it a boost of realism. All in all this movie definitely fits the bill of a good horror flick so I give it an 8 which means you surely won't be mad to sit down and check this one out when you get a chance.

So as you've noticed by the trailer, the film has a unique way of presentation, using the old-school aspect ratio. Its not perfectly clear whether they used real film stock, or created it digitally, but as someone who worked at a film archive, I can attest that they did a pretty darn good job. But is it scary? Is it really like the critics say, that its the best found footage film in years, being a ode to The Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby? Well no, its not anywhere close to those masterpieces, but I agree its much better than the found footage garbage we so often see. With a boat load of Hollywood found footage trash, we also get a wave of films made by anyone who has an iPhone, and the vast majority of them are terrible, and while Devil's Doorway is not amazing, its certainly to as bad as I'm used to.

But was it scary? Its hard to say yes or no, I would rather say it was hit and miss, some of it got me, some of it didn't. The atmosphere also appeared and disappeared, sometimes it was effective, sometimes it was either not there or was not as effective. Its no masterpiece, but it most definitely had some cool stuff in there. The aspect ratio adds to it, the story its based on is an interesting one (surprised it has been done to death), and some of the plot points, shocks, and scares were alright. Again, alright, not perfect. So don't go in expecting a masterpiece like some critics say, or are paid to say.

I'm not big into found footage, but this one is sort of footage being shot, not found. The priests are genuine, not typical Hollywood Catholic priests. The Magdalene laundry was a real place, and it wouldn't surprise me if this kind of thing happened in those horror houses-there were more than one in Ireland until the early 1990s, I believe. You sort of know what is happening, but you still want to see it to the end. Very scary, a few minor jump scares, and one or two major ones. Ghoulish, hellish, and pure evil. And the fact that there is an atypical ending actually supports the integrity of the priests while bringing into stark relief the evil of the antagonists.

This is a masterclass in how to do a low-budget horrormovie.

There is not a lot going on in this movie. Some might even say that it's a bit slow. But since it's a short movie, it doesn't drag out and it manages to stay tight towards the end. The style reminds me of Asians movies like Ju-on, The Eye and Dark Water.

There are some really clever shoots and some really effective shoots as well. Extremely well use of sounds and "off camera action". The special effects are done smartly. We the viewer often see very little. This is exactly how to avoid using a lot of cheap and ugly CGI.

The acting is good. The mother superior comes of as being 100% authentic.It's almost like 'Dolores Umbridge' in the Harry Potter movies. On one hand you want to congratulate the actress for doing a good job, on the other hand you want to slap her in the face with a chair because you so thoroughly hated the character.

There are some flaws. The shaky cam is done to death and annoying as hell. Most of the time it works in this movie, but "found footage" always create some plotholes. I mean, who found this footage? and who showed it? and why are WE seeing it?

It also has the same flaw as most haunted house movies: Why didn't they get out as soon as things started to go wrong?, why didn't they call for help? Why would you go around in the dark following creepy sounds?

BUT, if you are mature enough to suspend your beliefs for 75 minutes and jut follow the story as it goes, it's a pretty effective horror movie. If you like scary movies, old buildings, creepy nuns and jump-scares this is the movie for you.

The start is good, the acting is good, but the end is empty, don't have a explanation, so yes it end very confuse!

Came upon this and wasn't expecting much. Quite surprised when it turned out to be a decent little film. Okay it's obviously shot on a tiny budget but I think that added to it's effectiveness. Some good jump scares and at 1hr and 15mins it gets on with it. Definitely worth a watch....

In THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY, an anonymous letter is received by church officials claiming that a statue of the Virgin Mary, located in a "Magdalene laundry", is regularly bleeding from the eyes. The church sends a couple of priests to investigate, and document with video, this possible miracle. The events in THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY are a depiction of this investigation.

At first glance, THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY appears to be indistinguishable from the rest of the barrage of low-quality, low-cost, low-entertainment-value horror movies that appear in relentless succession each year. I suspect that so many of such movies are made because, though they only gross maybe ten dollars, they only cost five dollars to make. So, hey, that's a 100% profit return on investment. The fact that they're invariably utterly unwatchable garbage is just an unfortunate side effect, I suppose.

However, in a rather bizarre circumstance, THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY does have one incongruously positive characteristic: it features surprisingly good acting. The mean old mother superior and the has-lost-his-faith old priest and the possessed girl characters are exceptionally good, but literally all of the actors acquit themselves admirably and completely outside of all expectation.

To be sure, every other aspect of THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY is utter manure right along with expectation. Its actually discombobulating to see quality acting, literally where you least expect it, layered on top of abominable filmmaking like buttercream icing spread over horse apples. It's disturbing.

Here are some examples of the awful filmmaking:

THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY supposedly takes place in the fall of 1960. So, the camera equipment that the priests should be using should be, at best, state-of-the-art movie equipment from that era. Being quite familiar with the equipment of that time, nothing that happens in THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY even remotely resembles what using the equipment of that time would be like nor what the results would look like. The priest operating their movie equipment moves around and films with the ease and low-light capabilities of today's high-quality digital equipment because he's clearly using... today's high-quality digital equipment. Willing-suspension-of-disbelief is utterly absent from this movie. It's as if the makers just sort of "forgot" that the era was supposed to be 1960. NOTHING about this aspect of the movie is credible.

THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY uses the hackneyed old saw of "having difficulty with the light" to try to inject some horror and suspense into the proceedings. The light used by the cameraman-priest flickers on and off with the regularity of a strobe so that when the light comes back on we can have some scary ghost or something suddenly appear to jump out at us BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA!

Literally SURROUNDED and stewing in paranormal activity, everyone just keeps pretending that nothing out of the ordinary is happening. The old priest, as an example, keeps insisting that some unknown person is running around perpetrating all of these occurrences even though many of them happen right in front of them in real time.

And so on.

THE DEVIL'S DOORWAY is easily as terrible as the worst of these El cheapo horror pictures, ESPECIALLY of the found-footage variety. But I do still recommend that you watch it for the bizarre experience of seeing first-rate acting in an otherwise supremely amateurish film. It's a really odd experience.

Really enjoyed watching this. While it goes down avenues from other famous titles, it very much has its own edge and is pretty creepy. Had us on edge for most of the film and very much recommended.

This could have been so much better. The actors really gave it their all. The priests that go to the nunnery to investigate a miracle, the nuns and women that live their, and the backstory of the women/inmates that live there. How the story hints at one of the many dark facets of the church, but sadly the story is anticlimactic.

All that said, I enjoyed watching it as it is still miles better than many of the horror movies out there with bigger budgets, awful acting and a story that could have been written by a ten year old.

Do you know why are people still making found footage? Well, I'm gonna tell you: Because it is NOT a trash genre and because I (like other million of people) like it a a lot. Actually, I think that people that are not into this kind of movie have bad taste and are incappable of appreciate a good horror movie. Here's the thing i cannot understand: If you know that this film is about found footage, with shaky camera, and that grain immitating the old thing, and You don't like it......WHY DID YOU CHOOSE TO SEE THIS MOVIE?

The 1960s setting is great as is the acting. Unfortunately, they forgot to write an intelligent, compelling story. And so many loose ends. They start to investigate the "miracle" of blood tears flowing from Virgin Mary statues. Doesn't that sound creepy/disturbing? Why would the Catholic church consider that a miracle? They somehow jump to the conclusion that it means one of the women or a nun is pregnant. (?) That leads nowhere until one of the women says a pregnant women is locked in the basement. Of course, she's possessed so we're subjected to 15 minutes of her screaming and attacking people, a bed shakes, crosses turn upside down, she levitates, etc. I mean, really? Then they find--and film--a room filled with Satanic stuff. When they show the head nun the room moments later, all the Satanic stuff is gone. What's the point of that? And the priest don't even mention it again. Then it turns out the girl is a virgin what she's pregnant. And no one seems that stunned; even the Dr. is sort of, "Weird, huh?" They set up all these little scenes that go nowhere. Oh, and one priest hears children whispering to him, "We're going to kill you." Whispering kids are pretty non-scary to me, so this doesn't add any frights to the movie but of course, he has to race up and down the hallways to find the ghost kids. And while this is supposed to be found footage, there is a SOUNDTRACK for all the jump scares, along with scary music when they go to find the baby the girl gave birth too. And the end is a mess--I think the nuns are attacking the priests (you can't see a thing) and then the older priest is killed and then...film over. It's really a mess but again, such a great setting, well acted. Just lacks a great story.

In every industry people copy other peoles ideas, and that is normal if it is not just a cheap ripoff, As above so below

Yuk. The handheld camera technique (ala Cloverfield) needs to be banned for horror movies. When someone is chasing you with a chainsaw, one needs to turn off the video camera and stop taking selfies. Premise about the magdalene laundries and the horrible abuses that occurred under the Catholic Church, was a good start to the story. The camera work was distracting and motion sickness inducing, and really too silly and overused to be scary, and ruined what could have been a 4.5 star movie otherwise.

Very suspenseful...camera work was very clever and keeps you on edge throughout just waiting for the next thing to jump out and scare the bejesus out of you. Father Thomas plays the old weathered cynic very well whereas father John is the excitable young 'believer', almost as if to mimic the two voices inside your own head...the 'sensible one' and the 'scared child' who still believes in ghosts. I also liked the fact that it was only 75 minutes long as it felt quite punchy all the way throughout. Not a dull moment. Recommend if you just want something that's gonna get your heart racing without a load of blood and gore like so many so called 'horror movies' these days.

Will first of all i don't usually watch found footage movies but this film is freaking good the jumpscares are not bad but the way they edit it the movie 60's old camera effect it's a nice touch the story is good but little bit confusing overall it's a good moive to watch if you don't have any thing.

I wasn't even aware of The Devil's Doorway until someone linked me the trailer on social media. It looked truly terrible but I took that as a recommendation and gave it a go. The film was really oddly hard to get hold of, but upon viewing it I prepared for the worst as the trailer was pretty dire.

It tells the story of two priests who are sent to investigate a statue crying tears of blood in a home for "Broken women". You know the drill, weird things happen and everything goes to hell.

Irish made this is yet another cliched demonic film with a messy plot and more questions provided than answers. We've seen this before, but done considerably better.

Mostly shot in the found footage format so therefore meant we don't see much and experience a whole lot of "Shaky cam". That didn't do the already mediocre concept any favours.

Coherent but messy.

The Good:

The Bad:

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

If you listen very closely you can hear the exact moment the Priests heartbreaks upon being told there are no children there

Christians still think the pentagram has something to do with Satan

The idea sounded very interesting and creative, so there was enough to make one want to see it. The cover looked quite eerie. So saw 'The Devil's Dooway' with genuine interest and wanting to at least sort of like it even if it had many problems.

Seeing it, well 'The Devil's Doorway" is far from perfect and is not great but it was much better than expected. The good things are noticeable and for found footage it is much better than most, one of the better ones actually. Having prepared myself to do that, that was disappointing. Liked the concept quite a good deal, the potential is not quite lived up to.

'The Devil's Doorway' at least didn't insult my intelligence. It at least didn't make me angry watching it.

Surprisingly, it looks great. The setting is atmospherically spooky and pleasing to look at and the camera work was surprisingly accomplished-looking and clever, some nice techniques and angles here rather than looking amateurish and making one physically ill like most found footage horrors do. The editing also has atmosphere. The sound is creepy and not obvious or intrusive.

Also a nice surprise was the acting. This aspect, often one of the noticeably worst assets, was well above average. the best of it good even. There is engagement with the drama, they all look comfortable and it doesn't get unsubtle. The film starts off intriguingly and there are unsettlingly tense, creepy and suspenseful moments early on.

Later on however, the tension, creepiness and suspense dissipates and the latter stages sadly run out of steam. It becomes dull and predictable, as well as ridiculous and things don't make sense. The ending felt anti-climactic.

Dialogue is also quite ropy, with some awkwardness and cheese and parts are a little heavy-handed. The effects have instances where they do look under-budgeted and hasty-looking, not quite gelling with everything else.

Altogether, better than expected but flawed. 5/10 Bethany Cox

The main issue with this movie is that it has very little plot. There are many abandoned or red herring story lines. Not one is complete, to serve as the main story line. In the end, there is no logic in why characters were doing what they were doing or were in the circumstances they were in. There is no logic why they happened to be where they are. The reverend mother's role in the end does not make any sense whatsoever. Multiple characters could have served a greater role in the story but failed to. It almost amounts to an intentional effort to mislead the viewer, except, as the rest of the movie, it fails, because there is no plot twist. I expected much more, especially because practically all actors were good actors. Basically, if you make the mistake of watching this, if you start making theories in the process as to why this and that happens and who the characters might turn out to be etc, don't have high expectations. It turns out very dull.

I wanted to like this film, but the blatant anti-Catholic feminist nature of the dialogue ruined what could have been a reasonable effort in the realm of "found footage" material. I am NOT Catholic, nor religious, and I know what Irish women of "low" birth were once subjected to in places such as the one portrayed in this film, but being set in 1960, much of the dialogue seems to come right out of 2018, so it simply doesn't work well. No surprise the director is female and therefor determined to shame the Catholic church. But she's cut off her nose despite her face in making such an ideological film. The main problem being that the viewer can't really get past the ideology and focus on the actual horror scenes.

This movie is freaking amazing , the new found footage elements are very very well executed , loved it so far

The film has its cliches but is nonetheless interesting. I liked some of the priests conversations and questions and it would've been brilliant if they continued that path but the ending was rather wrapped up in the usual church themed cliches hence the rating for this film and the disappointment. The acting was good and believable and some issues regarding these shelters gave me chilling revelations and might as well depict a realistic point of view. Some issues with the film was the camera that's supposed to be from the 60s and that's not really true, there's no way anyone could've possessed a camera as such. But otherwise for horror fans, it's really worth watching. The found footage style was done good and not really a burden to the eyes. Well done Northern Ireland.

So the Devil's Doorway is another found footage foolish endeavor. This one is dressed up to be filmed in the 1960's. OK, If I sat down and watched this movie, shot not as found footage, but a traditional movie... I would have likely rated this a 6. As it is, It gets a really strong 3. It's got some scares, the young girls voices whispering makes the skin crawl a little, and nuns are always scary. I usually don't like these new attempts at making a film look retro , as if it was made and filmed in a different era, but this one would have worked well...if it wasn't a found footage genre film. In fact I would even give it a 4 or 5 if it was a standard film that incorporated the found footage into it in some way. Instead The Devil's Doorway took the dumb road and made it all just a standard (and by standard I mean really bad) found footage piece of garbage!

Another typical low budget "found film". The attempts to scare of even startle the viewer are boring and predictable. The story line is about as exciting as watching grass grow and ultimately unfulfilling. This movie offers no explanation, laborious acting and leaves the viewer confused and unsatisfied.