The Devil's Doorway

In October 1960, two Irish Roman Catholic priests, Father Thomas Riley and Father John Thornton, are sent to investigate a reported miracle at a remote Magdalene laundry. However, the two priests soon discover something horrific and sinister at the laundry. The conceit of the film is that Father Thornton as part of his work for the Vatican recorded his experiences at the laundry on his film camera, and The Devil's Doorway is merely the footage shot by him, which has been hidden in the Vatican until now.

Of the two priests, the older Father Riley is disillusioned in his work as a miracle investigator for the Vatican, complaining that he has seen far too much fraud over the years while the younger Father Thornton is a zealous priest who believes that they will find a miracle. The autocratic Mother Superior of the laundry makes it clear that neither priest is welcome while both priests come to object to how the women imprisoned in the laundry are being mistreated and used as slave labour. It soon becomes apparent to both priests that the laundry is haunted by the ghosts of the children buried within its grounds. Shortly afterwards, the priests find chained in the basement a 16-year-old girl, Kathleen, a virgin, but pregnant and possessed by a demon.

• Lalor Roddy-Father Thomas Riley.
• Ciaran Flynn-Father John Thornton.
• Helena Bereen-Mother Superior.
• Lauren Coe-Kathleen.
• Dearbhail Lynch-Eileen Murphy
• Carleen Melaugh-Sister Maria Louise

Clarke stated in an interview that she was wanted to publicise the horrors of the Magdalene Laundries in Ireland, saying: "“I had my son when I was 17, which was the year after the last Magdalene Laundry closed. People think these places existed a very long time ago, but that was 1997; the last one had closed in 1996. I was 17 and unmarried, I could have been in one if the circumstances has been different".[1] She stated that Magdalence laundries where women were essentially worked as slave labour for the Catholic Church were not an aberration in Irish life, saying: "Everyone knew. So you had no where to turn. Every person was complicit in a way, because everybody knew that they were there and what was happening. So girls could be plucked out of schools and sent to these places. That was the direct result of the Catholic Church apparatus, which created a situation where vulnerable people could be exploited for so long".[1]

In another interview, Clarke stated: "The Magdalene laundries are only one aspect of the terrible things that happened in Irish Catholic society. They were symptoms of the church/state apparatus, the combination of the two things created the mechanism. That's part of what the film is about for me: even if Lalor [Roddy] as Father Thomas wants to be a good priest and a good man, and that's what he wants to be, that's impossible within this system and within this society. It's the same with the nuns. Not all the nuns are bad - there is the good nun who sends the letter out, and she does want to do right by her faith - but everyone becomes a cog in the greater mechanism, and no one person can really make any huge changes."[2]

Clarke who lives in Northern Ireland and is active in the theater recruited most of the actors from her own work in the theater.[3] About the casting of Roddy in the lead role, Clarke said: "Lalor, who plays the lead Father Thomas, is the only one who didn't come through the process. We had been looking to cast a little younger, but, somehow, the script had fallen into his hands and he just got in touch and asked to read for it, having seen the script somewhere. I invited him to my office, he auditioned there and then and he was Father Thomas. Lalor had lived through all the social upheaval in Ireland through the sixties and seventies and was full of the righteous anger that the project needed. Like Helena, he was just perfect off the bat".[3]

About the filming, Clarke stated: "The whole experience was different. I'd made shorts before and I've worked in theatre a lot, but making a feature is different. We had about 16 days to shoot, on a tiny budget, very little lead-in or development time — we just had to do it. The sort of all-encompassing focus that helps you work through so many consecutive hours, with little-to-no sleep, and leading a team of a dozens of people is an intense feeling. But I learned that this is where I thrive. In fact, I learned that the set is my favorite place to be and I can't wait to get on to the next one".[3] She was stated that expensive productions like Game of Thrones that had been filmed in Ulster had vastly improved the technical skills of film crews in Northern Ireland, making it possible despite the film's low budget to bring in a very polished and professional production.[3] Roddy himself appeared in the first season of Games of Thrones in the second episode The Kingsroad as the assassin who tries to kill Bran Stark.

Jacob Knight gave the film a favorable review, calling it "pretty damn good" and especially praised Clarke's direction, which he called very skillful.[4] Anya Stanley wrote in her review: "What sets The Devil’s Doorway apart is its indictment of systematic Church atrocities of the sins of a nation’s past coming back to torment them, personified in the violated body of an innocent girl and her unborn, unwanted child. Sure, it gets tiresome to see the crosses flip upside down and the body contortion, right on cue. But the grand socio-political designs embroidered into these cinematic banalities makes their usage ultimately forgivable and interesting."[5] Stanely praised Clarke for her "sense of craft" and her focus on what the characters can hear instead of what they can see.[5] Shannon McGrew wrote "...Aislinn Clarke does a brilliant job of crafting a taunt horror film from the perspective of Father John. What I truly loved about this film, though, is not just the found-footage angle, but the true stories surrounding Magdalene Laundries. I’ll be honest, I knew nothing of these Laundries prior to watching the film and am now horrified by the treatments that were allowed to be executed by these nuns with the support of the Roman Catholic Church."[6]

Tracy Palmer wrote; "The real history of the film serves the story well as the concept itself for the homes and the facts that have emerged are the stuff of nightmares. Magdalene Laundries or Magdalene Asylums were essentially work prisons disguised as “treatment” centers for prostitutes, promiscuous women, and single pregnant women. They were harsh to say the least and the conditions were unbearable...This simple backdrop should be terrifying enough for any women and I'm quite frankly shocked we haven't seen more movies about these terrible places. Toss in some good acting, Sixties era film work and an interesting story and we have a compelling and terrifying feature film".[7] Eva Tushnet praised the film's atmosphere, writing: "What is so awful about a place like this one is its institutional power, its inescapable control of every vista, the sheer weight it brings to bear on the girls caught within it."[8] Tushnet concluded her review: "Toward the end of the film, we see several people receive last rites. In a way this entire film, made by a woman raised Catholic but no longer a believer, is an attempt to give blessing and burial to the real women who died without acknowledgment of their suffering."[8] Fionnuala Halligan praised Clarke's direction in her film debut together with the acting, which she argued compensated for the film's low budget.[9] Halligan wrote that the film's settling against the background of the real horrors of the Magdalence laundries gave it a vividness and a sadness that it otherwise would have lacked.[9]

Jason Best wrote in a review: "Pulsing with indignation at clerical hypocrisy, director Aislinn Clarke’s film won’t convert any found-footage sceptics, but it is a distinct cut above the low-budget genre’s usual fare thanks to its careful craft and strong performances, particularly Roddy’s."[10] Nick Johnston praised Clarke for her film, saying it would bring welcome attention to the Magdalence laundries, writing: "It’s a dynamic setting for a horror film, and Clarke’s skillful direction and palpable sympathy for these women prevents The Devil’s Doorway from falling down an exploitation black hole (not that it would have been a bad thing, necessarily)."[11] David Prendeville praised the film, writing: "The decision to shoot on 16mm film rather than replicating the era digitally creates an evocative and eerie aesthetic, as well as adding a further layer of authenticity to the picture...Smart in both form and content, this is an innovative, effective and necessary Irish horror film. It marks Clarke out as a distinctive talent to watch."[12] Patrick Bromley wrote: "...it was hard to shake the feeling that the movie plays like a collection of Horror’s Greatest Hits. Found footage? Check. Demonic possession? Check. Creepy nuns? Check. Children’s laughter? Check. Loud noises? Check. That it’s packaged all up in a single film couldn’t quite outweigh the fact that it’s all been done before. But here’s the thing: it’s all done very well. If you are someone who likes the found footage aesthetic and/or is creeped out by religious horror, there’s a very strong chance that The Devil’s Doorway will play like gangbusters."[13]

Marisa Mirabal wrote in her review: "Clarke shines light on a malignant history through captivating storytelling that appears to be seasoned instead of the work of a first-time director. She possesses a strength for scares rooted in realism but also in cinematic language that translates on screen through her craft. The horror genre is blessed to welcome another innovative female director who is telling stories and rebelling against the traditional gaze–pushing the envelope and experimenting in true artistic fashion."[14] Kat Hughes wrote in her review: "An inspired entry into the found footage genre with The Devil’s Doorway, Clarke proves that you don’t have to stick to digital to achieve greatness. Easily one of the most authentic found footage films that we’ve seen since The Blair Witch Project, we look forward to seeing what Clarke brings us next."[15]

By contrast, Noel Murray in The LA Times argued that the film through innovative in some respects and well acted was heavily cliched and ultimately unimaginative.[16] Frank Scheck wrote: "The well documented infamies of Ireland's Magdalene Laundries would seem to hold diabolically effective potential for a horror film. Unfortunately, the best that director Aislinn Clarke can do is this derivative found-footage chiller".[17] Jeannette Catsoulis wrote a negative review in the New York Times: "Wielding mostly 16-millimeter film, the director of photography, Ryan Kernaghan, mimics the home movies of the time with flickering ellipses and flares of dazzling, burned-out white. Some of his images, like one of sweating young women scrubbing sheets in a haze of boiling steam, are quite beautiful. Yet despite its brief running time, the movie feels dragged out; like the priests, it will eventually lose its way."[18]

In a negative review, Brandon Schreur wrote: "Nothing in this movie is actually scary. It’s all a bunch of clichés and jump scares that don’t have the lasting impression that director Aislinn Clarke thinks they’re going to have. You’ve seen everything in The Devil’s Doorway done before, and you’ve seen it done a lot better."[19] Likewise, David Day in his review called the film "pretty forgettable".[20] Jamie Righetti wrote :"The Devil’s Doorway doesn’t bring any new tricks to the genre, relying instead on the usual possession film and found footage film scare techniques. However, its exploration of Ireland’s dark history helps it stand out from the pack, and it’s just the latest example of women directors making headway in the horror genre".[1]

• The Devil's Doorway at Rotten Tomatoes
• The Devil's Doorway on IMDb