Winona had just had a big hit with "Girl Interrupted," and Ben Chaplin was impressive doing Montgomery Cliff's "The Heiress" part in "Washington Square." So what possessed them to do a cheesy "Exorcist" meets "the Omen" and "Rosemary's Baby" formula movie? In any case, the movie has a good opening twenty minutes and promises real scary stuff to come. You don't know anything about the characters or what's going on and that makes it a little frustrating, but you can forgive the movie for that. Unfortunately, the movie becomes less scary the more the silly plot and characters gets revealed. Probably the silliest moment comes when Winona tells Ben that he fits the profile for the "antichrist" because he's never been baptized. It is hard to see how Winona Horowitz could say such a thing with a straight face.Apparently the first time director is a great cinematographer. That is usually not such a good thing. Yes, Stanley Kubrick did make the transition, but most cinematographers are too concerned with the lighting and have no idea how to direct actors. That turns out to be the case here, where everybody is just doing monotone line readings.I confess my love for Winona, but even her presence only makes the film barely watchable and not quite enjoyable or fun.

Rosemary's Baby rewritten ( badly ) for the clueless generation ... This film reeks ... The acting is fine ... The story is basically "antichrist" appears on earth ... Done to death ... And as most people with a brain now realise that there are no gods, this sort of story no longer works ... The fact that whoever edited this was unable to put a narrative flow together from such a simplistic story is another matter I love horror films but would strongly suggest you give this one a wide berth as it offers absolutely nothing of interest This rule that you have to write 10 lines or more is really difficult with this film because it is so devoid of any interest that it really is just ... Sad ...Boring ... And a complete waste of everyones time

You can count the scary moments in director Janusz Kaminksi's "Lost Souls" on one hand and have fingers left over to form a crucifix. This derivative supernatural thriller about Satanic possession starring Winona Ryder has finally reared its accursed tale in theatres after New Line Cinema let it rot for more than a year in its studio vault. Originally, New Line had scheduled "Lost Souls" for release about this time last year, because Pierce Gardner's script dealt with the millennium. A similar array of movies, such as "Stigmata," "The Ninth Gate," "Dogma," and "End of Days" convinced New Line to confine "Souls" in limbo.Were they ever right!Now, New Line faces stiffer competition with the re-release of "The Exorcist," the scariest movie of all time. Brave lads that New Line are, they have concocted the silliest advertising campaign on record. Quoting their ad: '"The Exorcist' scared your parents. That was then, 'Lost Souls' is now."' This atmospheric but anticlimactic drivel imitates better movies, like "Rosemary's Baby," "The Omen," and "The Exorcist," but it lacks both the suspense and the anxiety a good horror movie needs to frighten audiences."Lost Souls" starts well, but falls apart because the Devil wimps out in the end. A Catholic "A-Team" of exorcists led by Father Lareaux (John Hurt), Deacon John Townsend (Elias Koteas), Father Jeremy (James Lancaster) and secular exorcism survivor Maya Larkin (Winona Ryder), appear at a New York psychiatric hospital to perform an exorcism on convicted murderer Henry Birdson (John Diehl) at his own request. Unfortunately, not only do our heroes botch the exorcism, but also Father Lareaux emerges traumatized while Birdson lapses into a coma. Maya liberates reams of Birdson's numerology notes. Decoding them, she discovers Satan will reincarnate himself in the body of a bestselling author who writes about serial killers. Ironically, writer Peter Kelson (Ben Chaplin) refuses to believe in evil with a capital E. Nevertheless, he frets when Maya reveals that the Devil wants to possess him."Check around your bed," she warns. "They usually leave a pentacle."Sure enough, the incredulous Kelson learns his sneaky girlfriend, Claire (Sarah Wynter), has placed a giant pentacle in the ceiling of the apartment directly beneath his bedroom. Meanwhile, Deacon Townsend tries to murder Peter. Eventually, Peter and Maya learn Satan will inhabit Kelson's body on his 33rd birthday."Souls" tries to be subtle when it should be shrill. The elegant photography with its muted black & white palette detracts from the horror and suspense. The dangers are similarly muted, and the showdown between Maya and evil lacks ferocity. Two scenes where demons approach Maya in creepy ways contain enough dread to make your skin crawl. Chiefly, Kaminski evokes fear with loud sounds designed to scare the Beelzebub out of you. Brace yourself for the broken crucifixion scene because it's about as chilling as this mishmash gets. Basically, "Lost Souls" amounts to a forgettable chick flick version of "End of Days."

"Lost Souls" is an eerie religious horror/thriller from first time director Janusz Kaminski, an Academy Award winning cinematographer. The movie follows Maya (Winona Ryder), a religious Catholic woman who is very spiritual and is a part of a small group of fellow religious people who perform exorcisms, investigate religious mythology, etc. But she becomes convinced that a famous writer, Peter (Ben Chaplin) has been pre-destined since birth to become a leader for Satan, after decoding the writings of an institutionalized man. When she approaches Peter about her findings, he is skeptical, as most would be. He's not religious and isn't a spiritual person by any means. But Maya and Peter both find themselves stuck in the middle of the bizarre happenings that have been predicted, and a final showdown ensues between the forces of good and evil.As far as religious-themed horror films go, this is a really good one. Religious horror films typically tend to get under my skin, it could be because I was raised Catholic, but they have always tended to scare me much more than say a slasher movie would. So, with "Lost Souls" being a film of this type, it did creep me out a little. The story has been done many times in various different ways ("The Omen" probably being most notable for this), but what I liked about this film was that it was crafted a little differently and wasn't quite what one would expect. The performances here were great, Winona Ryder and Ben Chaplin were both perfect and showed some significant talent. Philip Baker Hall and John Hurt have supporting roles as priests, and they were both also very good. To sum the performances up, the acting was all really wonderful and believable.The cinematography is what really soars in this film though - not surprisingly either, as the director is a cinematographer (who worked on both of Spielberg's "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan") and has won Academy Awards for his work. So naturally, the film looks stunning. Very flashy photography, dark and sometimes almost sepia-toned, and very moody and artistic all at the same time. I really liked the entire movie's 'look'. From what I've read on here it seems like the biggest problem people have with this film is the ending. I personally liked the ending. It was ambiguous. So what? It made you think a little and, while it was a inconclusive, it at least went out with a bang (literally). I've seen other films end in a similar fashion, but I think this film did it pretty well. It was daring and I liked that about it, and it didn't happen too fast.Bottom line - "Lost Souls" is a notch above most religious thrillers, and is very well acted with some amazing cinematography. While the ending may disappoint some, I thought it was at least fitting to the film and it changed the entire perspective of what had lead up to that point - it ended like that for a reason. Really not that bad. 7/10.