Several issues with this film. The blurb (as pointed out rightly by other viewers) was almost about a different film. The seance is almost random and character development is lacking to the extent of "hang on so which one is he again?" leading to a slightly confused plot. Hell even the title is mismatched as the translation of Latin was later amended to one which made more sense - yet differs from the film title. A rich mythological history that could be exploited to much more terrifying potential is pretty much limited to a painting of an angel. This depiction of power would also help to explain the half hearted attempt to portray multiple possessions of different characters, which is also only briefly touched upon. I loved the tunnel within a tunnel within a crypt as this kind of architecture isn't uncommon for old religious buildings, however the climax of the mysterious device is cut short and seemingly forgotten about as it makes sweet FA difference to the plot that follows. The creeper following the two surviving characters was also interesting as there is no clue as to the hows whys and wherefores of this ending.
Now for what I enjoyed: The location (albeit somewhat stereotypical) is creepy as hell and makes for perfect acoustics. You really do buy into the horror of hearing this being prowling, but not being able to really get an idea of location. And then trying to figure out whether that was scarier or the silence of not hearing it at all.I'm still undecided. Found footage was used pretty effectively and real limitations of light certainly added to the ambiance.
In short: this seems like one of those group projects where everyone has good ideas but doesn't really communicate and then whacks off a slideshow with one slide per person and wonders why it doesn't work. A little more communication and to be honest basic planning could have made this film much better than the end result.