Jamie
I have obviously seen the first Exorcist a few times over the years. Always great. I didn’t find The Exorcist scary, really, but I liked the tone and the effects. It was high brow crossed with genre. Anyway, I had never seen the second or the third. The second has the reputation of being one of the worst films of all time. For the first thirty minutes I didn’t disagree with that. It is hilarious. A shoddy moneygrab designed to ruin a franchise. But then this kind of wild Africa storyline started and I was turned around a little. It was just different and looked pretty cool with particular filmmaking flourishes that I dug. It’s not good (it ruined the franchise for a reason) but it wasn’t the worst of all time. As for the third, I was surprised I didn’t like it more. I enjoyed some horror aspects that felt more modern than other entries in the series… serial killers popping out of places and stuff. The problem is that it’s a little schlocky. George C. Scott is well past his prime and just chowing down on the scenery. So it plays like it’s made-for-TV. Felt a little cheap, beyond the studio-forced ending that everyone disliked. So that’s where I was for The Exorcist: Believer reboot attempt (we left the prequels for later).
To recap, Victor is a single dad raising his daughter Angela. He has lost faith after losing his wife in the 2010 Haiti earthquake, but Angela wants to feel connected to her. She goes out in the woods with a friend, Katherine, in order to summon her spirit but instead they summon something else. After several days missing they show up largely unharmed, but behaving strangely. That’s only the beginning as each girl exhibits all kinds of strange marks on their bodies and behavior once they are taken home. With the help of some neighbors, Victor tracks down Chris MacNeil, who wrote a book about exorcisms. She agrees to help them, but when she goes to see Katherine she is stabbed repeatedly in the eyes and ends up in the hospital. The parents and neighbors decide to do the exorcism themselves, even when their local priest is told by the church that he can’t participate. Things… don’t go well. The priest comes in and is killed immediately. The neighbor who decided to take on the exorcism is immediately like “oh shit, I don’t know what I’m doing.” When the girls, under the possession of the demon, propose that they must choose a girl to live and one to die, they are all aghast. They panic except for Victor. It seems like he has finally given in to belief in the divine, as well as belief that the demon is a liar. But Katherine’s father isn’t as calm and ends up dooming his child by choosing her. Katherine is sucked into the demon realm, while Angela awakens unharmed. THE END (or is it? I genuinely don’t know).
I’m gonna come out strong on this one. I think it’s terrible. Feels to me like one of the many subpar demon possession horror films that come out regularly every year. Except this one also has a bunch of random Exorcist elements shoehorned in so that it gets the honor of being included in the series. But it’s not better than those films and only suffers with those strained connections to the series. I can’t even tell if they added the Exorcist stuff in at the end or if they cut a bunch of it out… or maybe this is how it was supposed to be. But given the way they connected it to the series, the film really only works if you make up some larger Exorcist story that it will eventually exist within. But that also means that it doesn’t work on its own and now with the film doing so poorly there would really be a question of whether the rest of the films will even be made. What a disaster.
Hot Take Clam Bake! One little problem with the film. Demonic possession isn’t real. So the girls are obviously faking it and the people would all be indicted for murder (for both the priest and for Katherine). This is actually my biggest problem with horror in general. It’s not real… so why am I scared? People just need to remember that and they’ll be fine. Don’t even get me started on Science Fiction. It’s got “fiction” in the name, people. Get a grip. Hot Take Temperature: Hellfire.
Patrick?
Patrick
‘Ello everyone! Are we talking about a legacy-quel of what some people consider to be the greatest film of all time, but totally botched and borderline offense? Let’s go!
I have a few reviews to do as there was quite a bit of homework. I saw the original Exorcist years ago and loved it. Mainly I liked the interplay between the truly frightening depiction of the hospital and equipment that the men of science are using to try their own “exorcism” of disease, and the religious supernatural and the acceptance of it by Chris. I don’t necessarily think it is particularly scary, but that seems to depend highly on whether one was religious growing up.
The second is kind of a mess with a huge own goal in trying to involved Regan again when that feels totally unnecessary. Either you can deal with a different iteration of Pazuzu, a different demon, or an anthology version of things with a world whereby the exorcist exists in the mind, but dealing with a different idea. They choose none of those and instead make a direct sequel in which we have to buy into Regan being some supernatural healing avatar and Pazuzu specifically targeting those people. There is some nice stuff with Africa and locusts and James Earl Jones. And I’m probably in the minority in which I thought the hypnotism machine was an interesting extension of the theme of science vs religion from the first film, even though they overused it. Overall, it isn’t a great film, but it didn’t seem as big of a disaster as some of the reviews suggested.
The third though I can see why people dig it even though I’m pretty sure I watched the theatrical cut (and my understanding is the director’s cut is where it is at). Written and directed by the writer of The Exorcist and based off of his third book in a trilogy about exorcism ist takes the third route. Set in the same world it posits that at the moment of Father Kerras’ death on the famous staircase at the end of the first film Pazuzu placed the soul of a serial killer killed that very night called the Gemini Killer (and based off of the Zodiac Killer). Fifteen years later a detective and friend of Kerras starts seeing the M.O. of the Gemini Killer in the murders of others with a name that starts with K. In the end it is revealed that Gemini, in the guise of Kerras, has been in a lunatic asylum as it has taken 15 years for him to regain the ability to talk and move. Over the years he has developed a supernatural ability to commune with and manipulate dementia patients to do his bidding and so that is how several people are killed. In the end there is something like an exorcism as the detective shoots the undead Kerras in his cell and stops Gemini from killing again. The film is really quite interesting with new themes and an interesting take on the serial killer thriller. The main issue? Not scary and, as a matter of fact, unintentionally funny whenever the director tries his hand at being scary. Almost certainly an issue with this only being his second film. But he does, obviously, understand The Exorcist and I kind of dug it in the end.
Which then brings us to Believer … it is just one of those things where it seems like to me that Green and McBride probably understood what they were doing and the theme they were going for was effectively: the church is dead, so what do you do when there is nowhere to turn in a time of great religious need? And I think the ultimate conclusion was going to be the father (an atheist of sorts) saves his daughter with faith and love of his own kind (while the other child, the child of what could be construed as evangelicals, is not returned). If I were to field a guess this movie was noted to death and the producers flat rejected what they thought would be an antagonistic message. This is all speculation though, Green and McBride are from the South, so maybe they were going for something a bit more that speed. I wouldn’t know. It just seems like the film was cobbled together from a thousand mixed messages and ultimately doesn’t work.
Setting as a Character (Where?) for Georgia as that plays into some of the religious themes of the film. Let’s go for MacGuffin (Why?) for the dead mother motivating the entirety of the seance and subsequent possession by The Deceiver. And Worst Twist (How?) for obviously making the choice of who to save ultimately dooms that child. The movie is Bad I think, kind of boring, muddled, and fails as an entry in the Exorcist franchise.
I feel like there is an Exorcist legacy-quel hidden in here … I’ll write it up in the Quiz, but sure, it definitely also sucks. Why do we try this dumb stuff? Cheerios,
The Sklogs