The Rite Review: Who Rites This Shit?
January 29, 2011 by Keith Kuramoto
Filed under feature overlay, Movies
Possession is a weird thing. It compels seemingly normal people to do bizarre things, like go see The Rite, a blazingly dull examination of the controversy of blind faith and awkwardly contorted screaming people. Michael Kovak (Colin O’Donoghue) is an assistant mortician at his father’s (Rutger Hauer) funeral home, which we observe through an Alien3-autopsy-esque embalming sequence. Though his occupation and relationship with his father are of little 
importance, he is a “normal dude” who boxes, drinks, and I’m pretty sure sleeps with a local bar wench. Pushed by his father to attend seminary school, both Michael and the movie take the long way to figure out that the Priesthood isn’t his calling, even when he bears witness and gives last rites to a car crash victim, the cause of which is a Clumsy Father who teaches at the school (I told you they took the long way).
After the accident, the Clumsy Father’s last Hail Mary (Zing!) to convince Michael that Priesthood is The Shit is to tell him about an organization within the church that trains the faithful to become exorcists. It’s the 21 Jump Street of Catholicism. Rendering the first act of the film useless, Michael travels to Italy to begin his training after being awkwardly blackmailed by Clumsy Father over a scholarship/student loan loophole with the school (I know, right?). The facilities at the Excorcism school are super high-tech and the church has clearly commissioned some of the best interior designers in the world to make it all look more X-Men than X-orcist. Teacher Father Xavier (OMG! It is X-Men!) takes a cue from Darth Vader and quickly finds Michael’s lack of faith disturbing, sending him to speak with Old Ben Kenobi, er, Father Lucas Trevant (Anthony Hopkins). The two take on the cliché Mulder/Scully relationship of believer and debunker as Michael shadows Lucas’s various appointments dealing with purported exorcism cases. Then things really start to meander.
The Rite drifts through its first act, then proceeds to sleepwalk through its second as the characters wander around a surprisingly plotless structure. This becomes the inherent problem; the story is barely there and Michael is a desperately weak character who can’t find it in himself to push the movie forward. He’s not a man on a mission, he’s a man late for class. Counter to Michael’s anemic character state, Lucas becomes the most interesting person in the film: an unconventional exorcist, faithful and yet at times logical. Lucas is further embellished 
by Anthony Hopkins’ screen presence. Michael’s unfortunate character flaw mixed with the spry dimensionality of Father Lucas ends up making Michael not unlike Mark Wahlberg in The Fighter vis-a-vis Christian Bale: a person who becomes painfully overshadowed and ultimately stagnant by the second character’s scene stealing (By chance, Hopkins and Bale are also profoundly better actors compared to their associated counterparts).
The Rite finally culminates into some sort of epic exorcism that the film has been building to (and ruined by the marketing), but by the time we get there we’re so disinterested that none of it really matters anymore. Perhaps the wandering plotting of the film would have been tolerable if the suspense were properly built or we had a sufficient amount of scares, but unfortunately, neither happens. For whatever reason, The Rite is a PG-13 movie, which has negatively affected the final product, giving us a neutered, ho-hum journey that should be nothing short of horrifying. “Suggested” by the Matt Baglio book of the same name, the kernel of the idea is intriguing enough — a hush-hush school within the church that trains priests to become exorcists — but beyond that, no other key elements from the book exist in the movie. Point of fact, the film closes with a few post-script title cards informing of the current real-world status of the surviving characters, only these people seem to not exist in the book or on the internet, which hints in a none-too subtle fashion that the filmmakers want this to reside next to The Fourth Kind in the “fake movie is real” department, which is a shame because telling us it’s real will never compare to convincing us it’s real. One is good filmmaking, the other is as transparent as a public access televangelist.
Don’t listen to these critics who can’t see the good side of the film. It portrayed a good message which made me realize that we should strengthen our faith in God because He is the only one who can defeat evil.
I watched this movie,actors are great,specially Anthony Hopkins. I love the story. The movie is about loosing faith in God and keeping faith in God.. Some idiot here commented about this movie,telling this movie is not good. They didn’t even see the good side of the story.. “IT IS ABOUT KEEP BELIEVING FAITH IN GOD!”
The critics are silly fools. Please just ignore them. As a clergyman I have actually performed exorcisms. I went to this film thinking I would hate it. Instead, I actually found it to be quite well done and enjoyed it immensely. The idiot critics may sit in Hollywood and pontificate, but what do they know about actual exorcisms? Apparantly, they are just a bunch of ignorant fools too full of themselves. So please just ignore them.
I really liked the movie. Anthony Hopkins gave a superfantastic performance as did the rest of the cast. I could see Fr. Michael’s scepticism in his dealings with the exorcism and with matters dealing with God. I suppose it had something to do with his anger with God when He took his mother while he was still young. This was signified by his bending the small crucifix he was holding at his mother’s funeral. However, when given the choice of either accepting the devil as his master or Jesus Christ, He very readily proclaimed His faith in Jesus. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It showed that God had a plan for Fr. Michael and the way for that plan to be manifested was to allow the devil to possess Fr. Lucas and for Fr. Michael to exorcise this devil, Baal.
yeah, well I liked it and I’ve been so glad over the years that I don’t listen to many film critics rants or I would have missed too many good movies…maybe Kuramoto has a little too much trouble opening his mind..try it you might like it.
I actually enjoyed the movie. Had me thinking after I left. Anthony Hopkins is a great actor. Sure it wasn’t action packed and it had a slow beginning but overall it was a good movie.
Well, I liked it
All the expats / russians in my neighborhood went to see it…
I wouldn’t compare the roles from The Rite to The Fighter in any way shape or form. Sure, he is not as good of an actor as Bale, but that belies the point. Walberg’s character was overshadowed in life and was scripted to be overshadowed for most of the movie. His family and support group seemed to be more focused on his brothers past glory than his future success – and they go through that scenario in not-so-subtle ways.
Saying Walberg sleep-walks through the movie or gets overshadowed by Bale the “scene stealer” is an Epic Fail of a review.
An action movie junkie — I liked the movie — maybe 20 minutes too long. In fact, I could see it as a TV show. The movie (didn’t read the book) made me think that Kovak is really a very powerful priest that demons were trying to dissuade from priesthood because of it. Two reasons — one his mother said he had the hand of God on him (which later inspired his new-found faith) and two — of the two exorcists (him and Lucas), he was the only one to get the demon to tell him his name. In exorcism, they try to get the demon to name himself as it helps exorcise it and ultimately enables the exorcist to exert total control/power of God over the demon. Could it have been better — sure, most movies can be — but I still enjoyed it and thought there was a lot more there than the reviewer seems to think.
this ?
references to starwars… how original… nice thought processes
Wow, everyone who has commented on this review seems to have completely missed the point and have no grasp of sarcasm or coherent film criticism. I suppose the litany of professional critics who summarily agree with Keith’s point of view are also only interested in “style over substance.” Too bad you guys aren’t “smart enough” to know a bad movie — or a good review — when you see one.
Wow…I feel dumb after having read this review. Well hell, I wouldn’t even call it a review. Is this guy 14 years old? Really? “…he is a “normal dude” who boxes, drinks, and I’m pretty sure sleeps with a local bar wench.” Wow?!?
This is a terrible review written by someone who obviously has no clue pertaining to different genres of movies. Too bad you aren’t smart enough to understand it.
Wow, you sound like you either didn’t understand the movie, or you’re still a kid who likes style over substance. For example, you would rather watch “Legion” over “The Rite” because there’s guns and blood and action-and I’m sure you wished a lil nudity. But I’m sorry buddy, movies are good for more than 1 reason, and this was a good movie, anybody who reads this stupid review-go read a better one.