The Devil All the Time is a slow burn, thriller and melodrama with outstanding acting, exceptional editing, and precise cinematography. I love the focus on the theme of evil disguised as good. The film focuses on people who are thinking they are doing good under the guise of religion, God, and divine right instead of the harsh reality that they are terrible people committing terrible atrocities. Unfortunately, this is true to life. Obviously, this isn't saying all religious people are evil. It's more so that people are using religion as an excuse to commit crimes. The performances are all really good, and provide a look into the minds of sick, vile humans. The film is deeply disturbing because of how true to life it is and how it focuses on real life themes. It's extremely well crafted, and I love how it's presented, using voice over narration to dictate the flow of the film. The plot is a little convoluted, and the story could've been more thought out. Get ready for a slow descent into disturbing madness. This is one for the ages.
Add a Review
-
xxforkliftermattxx6 October 2020
-
Azanspy16 September 2020Wow. I thought I was in for something else. I didn't think this movie would be in such a high level on artistic grounds. Great story and the director shot with a correct pace which would not bore us. The casting was excellent and all did great. The music is other impressive thing in this movie. I'm happy that Netflix is delivering some content driven good movies nowadays. Overall, I recommend this movie because it's crazy and worth your time.
-
Prasina_sa_Marsa16 September 2020From the start, you realize it will be a long movie, with already being more than two hours long. It's a slow-burn movie, with a great story, great acting from actors that we love for their roles in other movies. Here we see they can be more, they took the risk and made something great and worth watching. Netflix as usual gives as every month a new movie to talk about, but this one we will remember for a while.
-
WhatcanyaDo21 October 2020Mean, cruel, and unflinching, Devil All the Time is indeed a highly depressing movie. It's also one I couldn't look away from. It's full of misery, loss, and irredeemable characters placed against a southern gothic background. Tom Holland's portrayal of a good man whose actions send him on a cascade of increasingly worsening situations is at the heart of this well-made flick. Good pick for an evening's entertainment if you're a Netflix subscriber.
-
chrisleverkruid18 September 2020If you want to loose trust in humanity, watch it. It has plenty of bad persons that like to do things I've never ever thought about. Religion is a thing that can drive you crazy. I love the grain and unsettling feeling I get from this movie. But I'm happy that I've great people around me after watching this.
-
SnoopyStyle19 September 2020The story spans from WWII to Vietnam War dealing with deaths in religious rural America. Willard Russell (Bill Skarsgård) returns home from WWII in the Pacific after suffering from trauma. He marries waitress Charlotte (Haley Bennett) and together they have son Arvin. Arvin (Tom Holland) would become an orphan. He moves in with his grandparents who have adopted Lenora Laferty. They are raised as siblings. Lenora falls for new preacher Reverend Preston Teagardin (Robert Pattinson). Oh, there is also serial killer couple, Carl and Sandy.
This is a jumble. There is a lot here. There are some good performances. Skarsgård is especially good. The cast is terrific. There is a sense of places and times. It would be nice if the story could be simplified to just Arvin's life. There is too much story with too many characters although it's never confused. I love the themes of religion and death. I also love that this movie is going for something expansive. It's probably going for too much. -
lukebohn24 September 2020I will make this very quick. This movie is a breath of fresh air for Netflix originals. This acting is superb, everyone brings their A game. The story is dark, but trust me it's not as dark as people say. If you have ever seen "The Road", that is very dark. This is just kinda f'd up. The story is complex but easy to follow, and it just get's you invested. Also a very good script with some lines that I will remember for awhile. The cinematography is very good too. Honestly, nothing really bothered me or stood out as bad. A very good experience, and I would recommend.
-
Wuchakk19 September 2020In backwood towns of West Virginia and southern Ohio during the mid-60s several characters converge around a disillusioned orphan (Tom Holland) devoted to protecting those he loves.
"The Devil All the Time" (2020) is a slow-burn Southern Gothic psychological drama with crime thrills in the mold of "Undertow" (2004) mixed with the dismal rural tone of, say, "Winter's Bone" (2010), "Mud" (2012), "Joe" (2013) and "1922" (2017).
The bleak story emphasizes the deep mysteries of life, like man's brutality to fellow man, premature death, unanswered prayer, religious misbelief/error, justification of sin, corrupt authority figures, the downward spiral of a criminal lifestyle, divine justice (whether you perceive it or not), hope and, maybe, redemption.
Some complain that it's ultimately pointless, but it's not. It may be meandering and ambiguous, but it's not pointless. You just have to be braced for a slow drama, degenerate characters, lots o' narration (by the author of the book), time jumps, convoluted storytelling and a muted emotional payoff. Another thing to consider is that the story doesn't become compelling until the last 50-55 minutes.
The movie doesn't ridicule people who believe in Christianity, as some have criticized, but rather realistically shows how certain individuals with mental issues can misinterpret the Scriptures or the Spirit's leading, as well as use their position to serve their carnal interests rather than serve people.
There are weird and disturbing aspects that are gut-wrenching or disgusting, but the author based these things on real-life cases.
It's a quality production with convincing acting/costuming/sets/locations, but the snaky downbeat story isn't for everyone.
The film runs 2 hours, 16 minutes and was shot in Alabama (Anniston, Montevallo, Birmingham, Oak Mountain State Park and several other points in the area).
GRADE: B- -
classicsoncall20 January 2021This is a film in which the connections among multiple characters isn't fully revealed until late in the movie. There are also a number of people who you key in on as principal players who suddenly drop out of the picture, though for obvious reasons as it turns out. As such, you may have to concentrate just a bit more on what's going on than in your average story with a linear chronology, as a handful of flashbacks are utilized to provide background detail that becomes important later on. For some viewers the slow burn nature of the picture may prove daunting, and it's dark themes may not resonate with the timid, but for those who stick with it, you'll be treated to a compelling drama of a young man who's forced to straddle the line between good and evil in an often unsuccessful attempt to protect the ones he loves. Despicable characters abound in the picture, none more so than the wicked preacher Preston Teagardin (Robert Pattinson), although his forerunner Roy Laferty (Harry Melling) I would consider a close second. By the time this film is over, you'll come to agree with the ill fated Sheriff Lee Bodecker (Sebastian Stan), who states to a young Arvin Russell in a critical flashback scene - "Some people were born just so they could be buried...". Turns out, there's a lot of that going on.
-
cool_andhot1 October 2022The story telling is non linear. There are flashbacks and forth which makes the movie more beautiful as it needed for the dark atmosphere. All characters living in different places are well connected together at some point in the story. Brilliant acting by all the characters especially Holland and Pattinson. Well written characters and dialogues so you will even connected with the few minutes appearing characters like the uncle and the neighbor guy. The movie is emotional but it will not drain you. The background music is very well done.
It is a two hour plus movie but you will be glued to the screen until the last scene and it will let you free in a nice way. -
gabriel_sanchez18 October 2020A powerful movie! Great storyline, great acting!
Every key actor steals the show when its their time to shine. The acting is superb and deserves attention.
The plot is very deep, strong and emotional. This also may drive away unaware folks, since the movie might feel like it is dragging a bit. And it kinda does. You need to be up for a long ride if watching this and, if you like heavy dramas, this is one you will enjoy.
The score is good, but nothing over the top. I think it could be something else, but probably it is shadowed by the acting and the power this movie has. -
alipinchie-966-30681516 September 2020When watching movies I don't normally feel too compelled to write a review but for this movie I will. The Devil All the Time by Donald Ray Pollock is a haunting, twisted story with many complex characters which is what makes the book so interesting because you don't know what they'll do next. Sadly, in the movie, directed by Antonio Campos, the plot is jumbled and the characters' subtext is thrown out almost all together. While I suppose this is to make the movie more mysterious and slow burn, it doesn't work for me. On the other hand the acting was phenomenal! Tom Holland, Robert Pattinson, and Bill Skarsgård took the cake for me. They're performances were hands down the best part of this movie. I could barely take my eyes off the screen during their scenes. Overall, the movie's plot was poorly put together and script could use some work (I do like that they used some dialogue from the book) but the acting was phenomenal and the cast did a great job with what they had.
-
ericknromero23 August 2023Hard movie to watch. It's well made and the acting is the real reason anyone should check it out, but it's quite the downer. I'm usually fine with darker subject matter, but this was two hours of "damn, that's sad."
Bill Skarsgård is credited first, but it's really Tom Holland's movie. Robert Pattinson, Sebastian Stan, Jason Clarke, and Riley Keough all had prominent roles in the film, and they all succeeded in making you hate humanity just a little more than you already do. Holland's character is what we think we would be doing if we were caught in the middle of all that.
I gotta give it to Skarsgård, though, because he acted his ass off and made us feel all kinds of not-so-good things whenever he was on screen. For Holland, who also was excellent, I think it was a definite choice to take on a role so counter to his Peter Parker stuff.
Antonio Campos, who I've never heard of, directed the film. Again, just because I didn't really enjoy it all that much doesn't mean it wasn't a good movie. He apparently likes the intense assignments, having directed episodes from The Sinner and The Punisher, as well as supposedly in talks to direct a prequel of The Omen. -
'The Devil All The Time (2020)' is an incredibly uneven experience. At times, it's atmospheric and compelling; at others, it's dull and undisciplined. Essentially, it follows a few different story strands featuring characters who eventually cross each other's paths in relatively intricate ways. It also jumps back and forth between a couple of time periods to provide backstories for some of its major players, focusing on their parents in order to give you a better understanding of what makes them tick. The picture deals with things such as faith, sin, delusion, fate and family, positing that violence always begets violence but sometimes can't be helped anyway. Occasionally, it's interesting and well-conceived, but it's just as often uninspired and clumsy. This is frustrating, to say the least. There's persistent narration (from the source novel's own author) that initially seems like a way to add flavour and condense the flick's lengthy set-up (seriously, it's about an hour long) but eventually evolves into a way for it to simply tell us what its characters are thinking. It isn't awful and can sometimes be rather atmospheric, but it feels somewhat intrusive and, frankly, unnecessary. Sometimes, it's almost like the movie is supplementing the narration rather than the other way around. Another issue is that the film feels as though it lacks a solid through-line. Even its individual stories seem like a series of isolated events until they suddenly start to come together towards its conclusion. It's in its final movement that the affair finds its most success, as its stories start to satisfyingly intertwine and a strong sense of foreboding creeps in. You're never quite sure how things are going to end up, which makes for a fairly tense finale. Overall, the film is a mixed bag. It's atmospheric, well-made and often enjoyable. It's also long, unfocused and relentlessly grim. It could have done with a bit of tightening up, to be honest. However, the further away you get from it, the more fondly you remember the experience. Perhaps that's primarily because it has such a solid third act. It leaves a stronger impression in retrospect than it does in the moment. In the end, it's a good movie that's dampened somewhat by its flaws. 6/10
-
lewishart18 September 2020When i first saw Tom Holland he was a great addition to spiderman. But my god he had much more to give and this film just shows it. We know bill skarsgard is an amazing acting anyway but also robert pattinson gives a brilliant performance. Back to Tom Holland. He is incredible in this. I never thought he'd go beyond marvel and into 18+ films. He suits it so much more and that lad is TALENTED! His performance is impeccable. This is one of the greatest films of the year.
-
ukuh27 September 2020The acting makes it a film worth watching. It is dark gnarly and twisted. The reason for the low score is because I did not enjoy watching the movie. It is misery upon misery and if that is your thing, you are going to love it. However it was not for me
-
JediMaster6628 September 2020Every performance in the film is flawless in my opinion. the characters are all very well written and the story is too. if this movie does not get any Oscar nominations I will be pissed. easily one of the best movies of 2020, not that I have seen many.
-
harry_tk_yung24 September 2020Tom Holland, the ultimate star and protagonist of the movie, appears only after the first 45 minutes. This 140-minute movie should have been a mini-series (someone may still make one, for all I know). As well, the brilliant support Robert Pattison appears only after Holland does. But then, the 45 minutes of "prelude" is comprised of no less than 3 separate stories, each good enough to become a separate movie. They are, of course, inter-connected in one way or another.
Story One. Vietnam veteran Willard (Bill Skarsgard) comes home with PTSD. While his pious mother wants him to marry Helen (Mia Wasikowska), he falls for Charlotte (Haley Bennett) at first sight. Their son Alvin (Tom Holland, and Michael Banks Repeta at age 9) losses both parents before puberty. After Willard's desperate prayers and sacrifice (killing Alvin's favourite family dog) fails to save Charlotte from cancer, he commits suicide.
Helen is the link to Story Two, which sees her married to mentally disturbed preacher Roy (Harry Melling), with whom she has a daughter Lanore (Eliza Scanlen). In a crazy moment, he takes Helen into the woods, stabs her to death, then asks The Lord to resurrect her. Like Will he dies too but not by suicide. The way he meets his death links to the third story. Lanore, just like Roy, becomes an orphan, losing both parents at the same time.
Story Three, a minor subplot in itself, is about a pair of criminals Carl (Jason Clarke) and Sandy (Riley Keough) whose business is in conning victims into compromising photos with Sandy, scantily attired or not at all. Roy is one of the victims. Another character in this arc is Lee (Sebastian Stan), Sandy's brother, a corrupt cop.
Remember: at this point, you have only seen 45 minutes of this 140-minute movie. Already, there are three stories each can legitimately claim a movie of its own. Arguably, what I have disclosed hitherto should not be labelled "spoilers".
The main story, as you surmise by now, is between Alvin and Lenora. There is a third, a preacher called Preston (Robert Pattison), who is charismatic like Roy but mentally sound, if devious.
Let me back up a little, and keep this as spoiler free as possible. After the opening 45 minutes, there is another brief prelude, set in 1957, just after the two children have separately become orphans. Alvin is taken into the wings of his uncle where he meets Lenora, a "step sister" adopted by his uncle. While there is no blood relationship between the two, romance is not on the cards. However, Alvin loves Lenora fiercely, as a sister. In this brief prelude, we see how Alvin braves a bunch of bullies twice his size in protecting Lenora.
Finally, we move to the main movie, in 1965, with a proliferation of period pop music throughout as background. Our two protagonists are now teenagers. The early part of the "main movie" runs parallel with development of the dark side in Alvin's character and Preston's cunning lustful scheme with Lenora as prey. I'll stop here before treading into spoiler territory. Suffices to say that usual elements of lust, pregnancy, violence, vengeance, confrontation, and body counts come in abundance, with poetic justice to boot.
This movie is a gutsy revelation of festering corruption (in more ways than one) under the serene pastoral surface of the Heartlands. Both the subject matter and the graphic visuals may be too much for some. Those who can stomach it will be rewarded with the enjoyment of some fine acting.
As mentioned, the cast is star-studded. With no gender discrimination, but reference only to this movie, the heavy-lifting is mainly by the men, and hence a heavy-weight male cast. Skarsgard, Melling, Holland and Pattison (in order of appearance) all shine while Clarke, in a comparatively less demanding roll, is still an impressive presence. One final observation, only of interest of Avengers fans: this is a reunion of Spiderman (Holland) and Winter Soldier (Stan). -
Brainscreens17 October 2020This movie changed my personal views on Robert Pattinson, I have never seen him in a role like this, this only proves that his acting skills is a force to be reckoned with. The movie itself is kind of bizarre and all over the place, the story can be a bit confusing to some and a little boring too, It is a movie that you watch once and move on with your life, the only thing that makes it worth watching is the acting.
-
henriquemmd23 September 2020António Campos should be really proud of this one. Usually I don't care for a narrator during this movie but when is Pollock telling the story everything gets better. Pollock gives an excellent narrative full of opinions and insults for each character. The story is well written, even with the cross between storylines witch is always difficult to do. The cast is superb! Everyone one is so memorable. My surprise was Herry Melling! He was great in every scene speacialy the one with the spiders
-
tachiiderp9 June 2021I think the film had some tense moments, some uncomfortable moments, and the acting was good, but the story just felt a bit too one-dimensional. It showed a bunch of terrible people doing terrible things and frankly, many of them did it for completely stupid reasons.
The most obvious is the preacher in the beginning. Roy Laferty killed his wife on the delusion that God will resurrect her immediately. Even his friend (or brother?) mentioned how stupid it looks after he did the deed. Then there's Willard, the main character's dad, who killed his son's dog as a sacrifice in hoping his wife's cancer will be cured. I understand people do dumb things and will use religion as an excuse, but that's about the only message the film went as far as telling you. Unless the message was implying that gotcha! Religion is the reason for these violent acts! But we know you can be a devout religious person and don't use religion to justify moronic behaviour. This isn't really showing the bad side of religion, but more about how idiocy leads to terrible things.
Let's talk about some of the other characters. The villains are rather straight forward. We got a pedophile priest, a corrupt police officer, and a serial killer. It is never explained why the serial killer kill people. Yes, he likes taking photos of soon-to-be dead people, but how did he get this fascination to begin with? And how does the girl just run with it for over a decade before getting tired of it? You can see toward the end she no longer wants to do it, but this was only done to create tension in the final moment between Tom Holland and the serial killer duo. Then there's the pedophile priest. He likes materialistic goods and dresses nicely. He gaslights how bad the food is so he can eat it for himself. And the crème de la crème, he manipulates young girls into having sex with him. Again the movie here doesn't try to offer an explanation for why he does this, and essentially shows, once again, how someone uses religion to act out bad deeds.
Of course, the girls never try to decline his invitations. Not one was shown to retaliate, and Tom's character, Arvin, only suspected the priest after an officer told him her sister was pregnant. Arvin was about the only competent character in this show. His motivations were clear, his background justifies his acts of violence, and he shows intelligence by tailing the priest and taking the bullies down. Unfortunately the intelligence stops there. Being a serial killer, Carl, the story even explains how he is paranoid and showed how he removed the bullets from his wife's gun. Okay, Carl, if you were paranoid and a serial killer, you didn't see how Arvin was very uptight the whole time in the backseat of your car? The script only displayed intelligence when it is convenient. It is trying its best to show that bad people will be punished, so Arvin needed to be smart to kill the priest, he needed to be alert and calm to shoot the serial killer. It is this type of convenient story writing that turns me off. These aren't the only examples either. I haven't talked about the corrupt officer's arc, but there are dumb moments there, too. The people he killed just let him come into his house and take their gun, knowing full well that the bullets are untraceable.
As a whole, I understand that the film depicted a bunch of average people going about their lives in the 60s of rural America. They lived in gullibility, made a lot of dumb decisions, and in turn resulted in a lot of violence. The show has no issue depicting uncomfortable things, such as paedophilic acts and violent acts. It tried to create a tense and gritty atmosphere in exploring the worst of humanity during this time.
However, many of its characters actions lack thought and come off as idiotic. Characters were only thoughtful when it was convenient to do so, and overall lacked complexity. Killing someone was often the only solution the characters know what to do, and there was a lack of intelligence anywhere you looked. I don't think the film and its script wanted the message to be: stupid acts can lead to very violent outcomes. It nonetheless often felt this way based on many decisions and behaviours of its characters.
Was it tense and gritty at least? Yes, but things will naturally be tense and gritty when characters are constantly facing the barrel of a gun. Effective tension can be created without such a direct manner and it was rarely seen. Overall, the acting was good, but the story failed to deliver an impactful punch. -
noehuertafalcon17 September 2020Good movie, great cast. I really don't know how two English boys can do a great southern accent, both so good.
-
chloegalley27 September 2020The devil all the time is an American psychological thriller. The film was very slow and boring at first but it does getter better if you can persevere for 2 hours of watching a movie. The acting from Tom Holland and Robert Patterson was outstanding and was very believable. I would say there was not much suspense but I started to enjoy it more as it got better. A bit of a weird film and it depends on what you like. The devil all the time has mixed reviews so watch it for yourself and see if you like it. Not the best film I have seen but I did enjoy it eventually
-
cruise0118 September 2020The Devil All the Time (2.5 out of 5 stars).
The Devil All the Time is a crime drama film with a talented cast ensemble that involves a dull story about religious themes. Sexual predators. And police corruption.
The plot follows Willard (Bill Skarsgaard) who is a vet. Comes home and falls in love with a waitress Charlotte (Haley Bennett). They have a son. Willard becoming obsessed with praying to god. And teaching his son about facing bullies and fear. While Helen (Mia Wasikowska) falls for a preacher who tries to believe that god is testing him. Years go by,Arvin (Tom Holland) and his step sister Lenora (Eliza Scanlen) who are close. She meets a shady preacher Preston (Robert Pattinson). While a corrupt officer Lee (Sebastian Stan) is trying to get reelection while trying to hide his sister Sandy (Riley Keough) and her husband Carl (Jason Clarke) behaviors. Not knowing they are picking up hitchiking guys and the husband letting them having sex with his wife.
It is a slow moving dull story that feels very thin. While coming across abuse, sexual predators like priest preying on young girls. And corruption.
The script narrative is also annoying that could have been done without.
The cast ensemble is great though that delivered there performances. Tom Holland playing a serious role. Robert Pattinson and Jason Clarke playing very dark roles. Bill Skarsgaard doing a great job.
Overall, it was a slow and dull direction crime drama. That could have been shorter. And better narrative dialogue. -
PopcornSugar3316 September 2020What a drag! I just wasted 2 hours and 18 minutes of my life...
This movie was boring. The pacing was way off. The first 45 minutes was way too slow. And then there scenes towards the end that felt rushed because of the lack of build up. The narration was unnecessary. I don't need a voiceover tellling me what I just saw happened a few seconds ago in a scene. The aesthetic also felt too glossy and sanitized. I didn't care about any of the characters. A big problem here is that none of the side characters get much of a spotlight and thus have no development. It's hard to care about them. The acting was solid, but nothing too memorable. I know people are hyping up Tom Holland's performance, but I thought he was okay at best. He's too soft faced and clean cut to play such a intimidating violent character. The oscar campaigning from his fans is ridiculous. There was nothing oscar worthy about his performance. The potential is there, but we might see it for his next role where he portrays a drug addict in the film Cherry. Anyway, I have no desire to watch this again. The whole movie felt pointless. Really disappointed after all the hype.