Horror franchises are usually known for their predictability. Once a hit is made in the genre, a slew of sequels follow a strict formula: slasher films featuring a monstrous force haunting young people, or ghost stories set in creepy houses. However, The Exorcist has always defied this pattern. William Friedkin’s 1973 film was a box-office sensation and still remains one of the top 10 highest-grossing movies of all time when adjusted for inflation. Yet, every attempt to create a sequel has taken a baffling and bizarre narrative turn, placing the theme of demonic possession in completely different contexts.
But now, David Gordon Green’s new film, The Exorcist: Believer, takes a different approach. Instead of deviating from the original plot, it follows a more conventional blueprint. The film is set in the present day with a few modifications, and it brings back well-known actors from the past to lend credibility, following the trend of “legacy sequels.” Green previously used this approach in his 2018 film, Halloween, which paid homage to the original and relied on star Jamie Lee Curtis. The success of that film led to two sequels, and now Green is attempting the same strategy with The Exorcist: Believer. Ellen Burstyn, who starred in the first Exorcist film and is now 90 years old, has been brought in to consult on a case of demonic possession involving two teenage girls.
The outcome of this approach is entirely predictable. Except for having two possessed subjects, Believer is a straightforward exorcism film that closely mirrors the plot of the 1973 classic. Distressed parents (played by Leslie Odom Jr., Jennifer Nettles, and Norbert Leo Butz) witness their young daughters exhibiting unexplained medical symptoms and behavioral changes that are eventually attributed to demonic possession, necessitating an exorcism. Friedkin’s original film depicted the ritual through violent writhing, guttural cursing, and the expulsion of vile substances. These motifs have been imitated countless times by pale imitators such as The Devil Inside, Deliver Us From Evil, The Last Exorcism, and The Exorcism of Emily Rose.
Interestingly, The Exorcist sequels have largely avoided the familiar path. After the monumental success of the first film, Exorcist II: The Heretic was released in 1977 under the direction of esteemed filmmaker John Boorman. However, it received critical derision at the time due to its significant deviation from expectations. The film explores African environmental politics and brain wave-linked machines and features a psychic battle with the devil in the form of a locust swarm. Although occasionally perplexing, it is an admirably unusual work that defies easy categorization and has gained a cult following over time (even Martin Scorsese has expressed a preference for it over the original).
In 1990, The Exorcist III attempted to stay closer to the original by having William Peter Blatty, the writer and director of the original Exorcist, return. For this sequel, Blatty adapted a different book of his, a serial-killer drama called Legion. The Exorcist III is essentially a supernatural-infused hard-boiled cop drama, featuring a hunt for a Zodiac-like serial killer in which the devil himself may be involved. Then, in 2004, Paul Schrader was hired to direct a prequel to the first film; however, the studio was dissatisfied with his contemplative work and instead shot a new version, titled Exorcist: The Beginning, directed by Renny Harlin. This film primarily functions as a religious action movie with priest Lankester Merrin (played by Stellan Skarsgård) battling the devil in 1940s Cairo. The movie was so poorly received that the studio ultimately released Schrader’s completed version, titled Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist, which offers a more intriguing (though slower) take on the same characters and setting.
There is a valid reason why each sequel avoided replicating the dramatic impact of The Exorcist; despite numerous attempts, it remains unmatched. Even with an extensive modern CGI budget and the enthusiastic support of Universal, which spent $400 million on the rights and planned a film trilogy, The Exorcist: Believer fails to deliver many genuine scares. The shock value of the original is lost because the two possessed girls are given makeup jobs similar to Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair) in the first film. After so many imitations and parodies, their profanity-laden grunting and levitation no longer feel provocative.
A compelling emotional foundation could have helped the story, but the backstory of Victor Fielding (Leslie Odom Jr.), the distraught father, and his daughter Angela (Lidya Jewett) is a generic tragedy where Angela lost her mother at birth. The inclusion of Burstyn’s character, Chris MacNeil, Regan’s mother, feels pointless and merely serves as a connection to the original Exorcist, confirming that Angela and her friend Katherine are indeed possessed and that modern medicine cannot save them. While The Exorcist: Believer flirts with an intriguing idea—the Catholic Church refusing to approve an official exorcism due to safety concerns—the end result is not significantly different. It is still a group of adults shouting prayers and exhortations at possessed girls in a room.
If two sequels are indeed planned after The Exorcist: Believer, Green and his producing partners, including horror mogul Jason Blum, would be wise to consider the previous approach to Exorcist sequels. Exploring other genres or narrative styles in the context of demonic possession could lead to more daring and innovative results. Another conventional movie like this one would inevitably feel derivative and simply cower under the enormous shadow cast by Friedkin’s masterpiece.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
