Stay Up for Late Night With the Devil

I was recommended Late Night With the Devil by a work associate, and didn't think much of it. I'd been meaning to watch it for a while because the premise of a late night talk show in the 70's that could allow the devil into the world sounds like a great time. Boy, do I regret not watching this sooner. TL;DR if you like slow-burn thriller/horror, then this is for you.

Image by Medium

The story focuses on a talk show host, Jack Delroy, trying to compete with the great Johnny Carsen for late night talk show ratings. In a last-ditch effort, he decides to bring a "possessed girl" on the show during a Halloween episode and all hell breaks loose. Let's start this off by saying this was an independent film. That usually means poor quality or bad special effects, low budget etc. And the low budget is correct. This film was made for around a million dollars and yet some of the special effects used are easily better then anything Hollywood has churned out in the last decade. Sometimes necessity is the mother of creation. Having a smaller budget forces these films to be creative and solve problems rather than just "do it with CGI" and because of that, it feels more real. The movie is even shot in 4:3 for CRT tv's just to add that small nuance to it. The set pieces, wardrobe and general esthetic perfectly matches a 70's talk show. You almost feel like you're watching an old show that includes some behind the scenes footage.

Image by Mashable

As I said, this movie is a slow-burn, rev-up thriller/horror that easily reminded me of when I was younger; horror movies took chances and didn't just rely on jump scares. The movie takes it's time and slowly builds the excitement, wonder and suspense right up to, and past, the climax of the movie. The talk show has a number of acts lined up as these late night talk shows usually do and one by one, they come out as you'd expect them to, and they do their bit, and then sit down for the next. But almost immediately you know something is...off...about the acts. And it's not an acting problem or cinematography issue, it's intentional. The movie and script is done in such a way that you're expecting something to happen, but you're still kinda' surprised when it does.

Image by Kinorium

What really brings the movie into A+ material was Ingrid Torelli's portrayal of the young possessed girl Lilly. Her acting was just amazing, especially for an 18 year-old actress. She brings her A-game here and encapsulates the audience with her performance. Definitely reminded me of Rosemary's Baby or even the original Omen with a hint of Exorcist. As soon as she steps on stage on the show, you feel something is just wrong. Something is off about her. That can only be portrayed by expert acting. Her presence was enough for you to know what's going on. Her subtle movements, jerks, eye movement. Just perfect for the roll.

Image by Nerdist

This is all not to say that it is a perfect film. There's no such thing. Are there moments where it may be a little too slow? Possibly. Is the dialogue a bit cringey, well yeah, but it's supposed to be a talk show after all. The script isn't Shakespeare and the movie won't win an Oscar for best lighting or direction, but it was easily one of the most original takes on the "possessed" genre I have seen in a very, very long time. Don't misunderstand me either, I think the set designers, practical special effects artists and folly designers (sound effects that are not seen. The REAL makers of movies IMO) deserve a gigantic amount of praise to be able to do what they did on such a shoe-string budget. It's remarkable.

Image by People

Okay, now I have to address the elephant in the room. Many of you I'm sure have heard that this movie incorporates the use of AI image creation. This is true. However, I am not against this. I think that a movie with this lean of a budget would have to cut some corners wherever they could to make it happen. I am an avid AI image creator myself, and I do not believe that AI image creation is "stealing" other artists work. No more than an artist themselves looking at something and then creating it in their own way, this is what AI does. It samples images online to create something new. Whether artists want to admit it or not, somewhere along the way, they saw something they really liked and that influenced how they created art. Every new thing they saw, added to their understanding of art, and therefore, they got better at the art. This is no different than AI. I agree that it sucks that AI will replace many art jobs in the future, however, they are far from the only people who will lose their jobs to any form of AI. This is the future. This is a tool. And the film used it as a tool. Had the movie been created entirely from AI, we may be having a different conversation, but it wasn't. AI was used in 3 images. Yes, one of which is the main logo for the show "Night Owls". Boo hoo. AI is faster, more efficient, cheaper and generally speaking, more precise to what someone is "thinking" of seeing than trying to describe it and having a conceptionalistic artist create something. I applaud their use of AI here, and I would have done so myself without hesitation.

Image by Try Open AI

In closing, if you are willing to give a chance to a no-name studio, and you're willing to pay attention to the story. If you're tired of horror movies simply pulling jump-scares on you, then you will not be disappointed by this. See it wherever you can.

Overall score: 8 out of 10 stars

Pros:

- Unique take on the "Possession" sub-genre of Horror movies.

- Superb acting. 

- Amazing set, folly and special effect design, considering the tiny budget.

Cons:

- Is a slow-burn (I like it but I understand not everyone does). 

- The ending almost feels a bit rushed. 

- The 70's esthetics won't be for everyone.