The true story about a woman constantly raped and beaten by a ghost in the house. The visuals for the electricity ages, but the performance from Barbara Hershey and other forms of special effects are quite startling. It was very scary and intelligent. Intense and unexpected when the ghost would strike next. Exciting and powerful. Very well done.

"So the ghost rapist movie was actually pretty good," said I to my wife in such a way like I'd say I had a good day at the office.What was so captivating, if that's the word to use, about The Entity is that it's an almost philosophical examination of fantasy vs reality, of which side is going to appeal to someone, and usually that is either based on the evidence presented to the person, or simply how that person sees the world concretely. At the same time it's also Poltergeist for adults; yes, there's nudity (maybe, arguably, at one point the sort that might be enticing for people looking), but mostly it's presented in a way that is meant to be shocking. This is about rape and the reaction that people have to it - by 'people' I mean, mostly, men and how they can possibly fathom it... which is to say, at least for some, 'hey, she was asking for it, or she brought it on herself.' I mean, come on, Barbara Hershey wearing those revealing clothes at night like, you know, most people wear to bed! So salacious! This is a film that has that philosophical/sort of psychological angle about who is clinging to reality (i.e. Ron Silver) and who isn't (the para-psychologists), but how that gets tossed on its head. Of course one expects the sort of formula that, more or less, Poltergeist the same year helped to mount (and to another extent The Exorcist 10 years prior): a person/family keeps getting attacked by a supernatural entity, science or the law is called in first, they're no help (or the people/person don't want that kind of help), and then it's time to turn to the realm of the unexplained: priests and/or the kinds of doctors that come in and say things like, "Back off, man, I'm a scientist" when asked a question.Kidding aside, this is a disturbing movie to watch, as it should be. This 'entity' continually rapes and violates the Hershey character, and it's even to the point where this ghost or whatever is in such a don't-give-a-f*** mode that he does this in front of her kids (there's an interesting moment between the son, who believes this thing is real, and Silver who is never convinced even by the end, about this split in what this thing is). When the first time it happens, director Sidney J Furie lays on the soundtrack a little thick - there's a pulse-pounding, almost rock chord struck over and over again, not unlike a chord that was used in The Shining but more fierce, too over-bearing - but eventually it lines up with how we're meant to try and possibly be in her position: what to do when there IS a thing that is coming for you, and nevermind if you're in the house or not, it'll kill you in you in a car or wherever, and there's someone passionately, pleadingly, trying to bring rationality into it.Furie said in an interview he doesn't consider this a horror movie. Is this the sort of answer a director with some loftier intention might give (not saying he's pretentious, just that he thinks it's more than a genre movie), or is there more to it? I think there is; there are some terrifying set pieces, and one involving Hershey's boyfriend played by Alex Rocco that is rather mortifying (both for what is happening to Hershey and Rocco's response afterwards). And every character is presented as a rational adult, there's little room for the sort of hacky bull that one sees in supernatural-ghost-possession-etc horror movies that flood cineplexes today. Furie has some stylistic tics as a director that get overused - the split diopter is fine, but eventually he makes De Palma look sparse in his use of it by comparison - and it's fair to criticize how many of the attacks (and the rapes) are repetitive. Perhaps that's the point though, that such a monster would continue the same path over and over.But what about all of this from a feminist angle? Is there one? I thought more than a few times about the distinction the script makes, if it does at all, between the violating of her mind and the violating of her body - is it one and the same if Dr. Sneiderman is probing for the deeper problems in Carla's past as if she is already getting, uh, probed elsewhere? Ultimately this is her story, and while the very end (which I won't reveal) is rather bittersweet, it is an ending that makes it interesting how much isn't resolved, mostly in her mind, and this is whether or not Furie intended this. Near the end Hershey's Carla Moran has that declarative moment that's meant to be inspiring, or reach some catharsis: "You can kill me, but you'll never have me." Woman, hear me roar? Or the final gasp of someone who has been pushed around by a total creep, as well as being pushed around by others not believing her (i.e. not believing a rape victim)? Either way, it's an effective movie that gets better as it goes along and poses deeper underlying questions, regardless of some of its over-used theatrics.

The concept alone is terrifying. It doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman. The idea of an invisible being or force repeatedly attacking you is enough to explore in one film especially a horror film. To do it right you need someone who can sell this to the audience. Someone who will keep it from coming off as sleazy. Thankfully, Barbara Hershey succeeds in her portrayal of Carla Moran and her performance is one of the biggest strengths of the film. However, without Hershey the film would suffer tremendously and fall apart because unfortunately Hershey's performance is not only one of it's biggest strengths, but one of it's only strengths.Now I'm not saying the supporting cast is not good. In fact, the performances by the supporting cast members are solid all around for what the script gives them. As others have pointed out in their reviews the script is indeed sloppy. The tension steadily rises for the first half of the film, but after the halfway point the tension is jagged going up and down to the point that it almost feels like another movie. Of course in order for me to go any further I'd have to go into spoiler territory.***SPOILERS*** Once Carla's friend witnesses the titular Entity in action and Carla no longer feels that she's alone (Hershey does an excellent job portraying the wave of relief one would feel in that situation) the second half of the movie begins leading the film to decline in quality. Earlier I said the second half feels another movie and it does, specifically "Ghostbusters" (1984), but not in a good way. I'm not joking. Carla gets the help of three parapsychologists who help her combat the supernatural Entity and try to capture it. The film even has it's own Walter Peck in the form of Dr. Sneiderman (Ron Silver), who looks like the coke-head executive Harry Ellis from Die Hard. Sneiderman is a character that is fine for the first half of the film, but ruined in the second half no thanks to the sloppy script.In the first half of the film Dr. Sneiderman is portrayed as an understandably skeptical and logical man, who is reasonably reticent to think that Carla is affected by anything supernatural. He comes across as fair, level-headed man of science. Yet that all dissolves at the beginning of the second half. Unlike Walter Peck, who had never talked to eyewitnesses of the supernatural had justification for being skeptical of the supernatural whereas Dr. Sneiderman has none. Dr. Sneiderman devolves into an incredibly annoying, close-minded jerk who ignores eyewitness accounts from several people including Carla's boyfriend. I know I'm spending a lot of time on Dr. Sneiderman, but he really is a big problem for the film during the second half and frankly this character really drags the film down. The psychologists are frustrating to watch at this point because the audience and other characters know there's supernatural forces at work, but they refuse to listen. The end is also a bit of a mess. By that point in the film Hershey and the supporting cast are doing their best with the material they're given. Sadly, the ending leaves much to be desired. You really don't know what the Entity is and this is an instance where ambiguity hurts the film. There is no real satisfaction save for that Carla has become stronger from this ordeal I guess. Other than that there are a lot of unanswered questions and not in any contemplative or compelling way.All in all the Entity is a mixed bag of a horror film that starts off strong for a solid hour, but falters at the second half. Still its worth your time at least for Barbara Hershey's wonderful performance. In short, I personally wouldn't call this one of the 11 scariest films of all time like legendary filmmaker Martin Scorsese, but to each their own.

The Entity is a very effective little horror gem. I will start off with the stuff I did not enjoy. First is the ending which is very cheesy and goes against everything the first part of the film was building towards. And the Film does suffer a bit when they bring in the paranormal investigators come into the story. The acting is serviceable at the least and the musical score is as shocking and excellent. The first part of the film is truly terrifying and scary. The rape scenes are brutal and not for the faint of heart. See this flick if you want to see a good supernatural horror film. Skip it if you are easily disturbed by graphic paranormal violence.