The David Gordon Green-ified first part of a trilogy requeling The Exorcist officially opened today. It avoided the Swift-pocalypse. I realize these are horrible sentences with awful words for anyone to be writing or reading, so thank you for bearing with me.
I want you to know that I came close to liking The Exorcist: Believer, but it had way too many weaknesses.
It’s still better than Exorcist: The Beginning though. SPOILERS
Continue reading
I was there in 1999 for the theatrical release of The Version You’ve Never Seen Before (a version of The Exorcist that, as I explain here, I didn’t care for and still don’t). Until today, that was the first and only time I’ve seen the movie in theaters.
The 50th Anniversary of the movie is being celebrated this October with a theatrical re-release, and a new Blumhouse/David Gordon Green sequel is premiering in four days. Fans are perhaps rightfully apprehensive about Exorcist: Believer, featuring the return of Ellen Burstyn as Chris McNeil. I myself have a surprising, almost overwhelming love for 75% of the Exorcist “franchise”, so stay tuned to this blog for my thoughts on this new chapter.
The version I saw this afternoon is something called “The Extended Director’s Cut,” and if I’m not mistaken, it’s a print that’s even further from “The Director’s Cut,” which takes elements from “The Version You’ve Never Seen” but excludes the worst parts of that one, such as the cheap, worthless CGI morphs slapped all over the place.
For me it was definitely a new experience of watching The Exorcist. Here’s why (spoilers for “The Extended Director’s Cut”}:
Continue reading
“The possessed person looked and acted just like Linda Blair – in ‘Repossessed'” – Ain’t It Cool News
We’re on the day of the premiere of The Exorcist TV series on Fox (I’m frustrated that I can’t currently access it). And as I figure out how to view it, I continue my retrospective of The Exorcist series with what I consider to be the true shame of the franchise- Exorcist: The Beginning.
“Once the wings have brushed you, is there no hope?”
I love Exorcist II: The Heretic.
There, I said it. It’s liberating. I have voiced the most shameful secret any horror fan could harbor. I and others like me can now march in the streets with our locust flags flying high, in pride.
I adore this loony, insane, beautiful mess. And a mess it is. Universally reviled, considered one of the biggest turkeys in cinema, Heretic holds up for me as an unintentional comedy and as a weird, original, meta-philosophical bit of art house cinema. It is the perfect example of the 1970’s excesses of visionary egomaniacs with relative carte blanche to make vanity masterpieces, or disasters.
My first viewing of The Exorcist was at age twelve, which, coincidentally, was Regan McNeil’s age when her possession occurred.
My older sister told me the plot of the film, minus of course the really ugly shocking bits such as the crucifix rape scene. My sister was great at relating horror movie plots – she gave me a fascinating rundown of Halloween as well. And she’ll tell you she hates horror movies! I’m not even sure that she had seen it – she may have just been recounting what she heard from others who saw it. At that point it didn’t sound like something I couldn’t handle.
It’s been a rather possessed August. When personal misery overwhelms, a supernatural/horror obsession is something of an anodyne. Don’t ask me why.
I’ve been reviewing criticism of ‘The Exorcist’ and its sequels, reading interview after interview with William Peter Blatty, Linda Blair, William Friedkin and others involved in the most amazing and frightening film ever made.
And you know what? Many fine minds are weighing in – from this excellent podcast, to this academic who, to my delight, is providing analysis and criticism on the recent wave of exorcism themed films. I wrote a lot about this recent wave of films when this blog was on Open Salon.
Chillerpop 