David Gordon Green’s revisionist take on the Halloween franchise was polarizing, but don’t expect his version of the horror classic The Exorcist to have a similar fate. Instead, it seems likely that this derivative slog will be met with almost universal hatred. The Exorcist: Believer is not just one of the worst legacy sequels ever made, but a terrible horror film in its own right — completely lacking in scares, emotion, technical merit, or anything else that would make audiences care about what happens.
The movie follows the families of two girls who disappear into the woods and return three days later with no memories, as they begin to suspect that demonic forces may be in play. The most damning thing that can be said about this sequel is that it doesn’t feel like an entry in the franchise, but one of the many rip-offs that have existed in the subgenre in the decades since the release of the original.
From the moment The Exorcist: Believer starts, it’s clear that the film is on the wrong path. Like in the original movie, one of our first encounters with the characters is in an exotic locale. Only rather than Iraq, the legacy sequel begins in Port-au-Prince — specifically in the year 2010. Before you ask, your assumption is right. Someone thought it wise to have the inciting incident of a horror movie be the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and it’s just as exploitative as it sounds. It’s very possibly the worst appropriation of tragedy since Remember Me.
The Exorcist: Believer is a soulless imitation of the classic original
Yet, while this scene exists entirely for the purpose of killing off the protagonist’s wife, this barely plays into the character’s arc until the final act. For much of the film, Odom Jr.’s character has no growth — his only mission being “save my daughter.” Only in the last 20 minutes does he experience anything close to a psychological challenge.
Also Read: Halloween Ends Review: An Ambitious and Radically Different Conclusion to the Franchise
It’s frustrating to see so many talented actors put to waste by a script that largely asks them to be lethargic. Leslie Odom Jr. is virtually sleepwalking through his role, but it would have been difficult to expect more of him considering that his character is paper-thin. The only redeeming factor of his performance is his chemistry with young actress Lidya Jewett, who plays his daughter. (Jewett herself, as well as her fellow tormented soul Olivia O’Neill, are fine — if nothing out of the ordinary for the genre.)
The often wonderful Ann Dowd is also put to waste in a role that too often leans into hysterics. Dowd overacts in virtually every scene — although that seems to be what she was asked to do — giving a performance that feels like the type of character you would see for one or two scenes in a demonic possession movie, but used through pretty much the entire second and third acts.
As for returning actress Ellen Burstyn, reprising her role from the original horror masterpiece, David Gordon Green had to have been trolling the audience with this one. Somehow, the cameo manages to feel both like blatant fan-service and the most insulting treatment possible of one of the richest characters in the horror genre. And yet, Burstyn being as fine of an actress as she is manages to be the only one in the cast who gives her line readings any gusto.
Ultimately, every good idea the film has feels undermined by borderline incompetent editing and stunningly ugly cinematography. For example, the movie proposes the idea of an “interdenominational exorcism” heading into the third act, but never really explores it. And the most thrilling challenge the film levies against its characters and audience is interrupted by some literal deus ex a metaphorical machina.
That’s not to say The Exorcist: Believer has very many good ideas. One of the most baffling decisions in the movie is a sequence that can only be described as an “Avengers Assemble”-style scene for a bunch of people involved in an exorcism. These aren’t legacy characters, mind you — they’re people we’ve only seen a few times in the movie: some neighbors who have tried to help the protagonist, a protestant preacher who had a single scene earlier in the film, and the like. This is one of many decisions that makes it clear Green is desperately looking to elicit a reaction from the audience, and he succeeds in very little but making them laugh.
The only thing that is truly good in The Exorcist: Believer is the make-up work. Unfortunately, the final act — the climactic exorcism — turns into a CGI abomination, rather than the practically-driven chiller that was the first film. It’s like Green doesn’t even understand what made the first one scary. Instead, all we get in this lifeless legacy sequel is a bunch of shouting.
According to film critic Ed Whitfield, William Friedkin once said “My signature film is about to be extended by the guy who made Pineapple Express. I don’t want to be around when that happens. But if there’s a spirit world, and I can come back, I plan to possess David Gordon Green and make his life a living hell.”
Well, if I were David Gordon Green, I’d be watching my back. The travesty of a legacy sequel that is The Exorcist: Believer is flattering on no one, except perhaps Mr. Friedkin — as it really reminds you of how extraordinary of a filmmaker the late master was, and how we might have taken the original film for granted.
The Exorcist: Believer hits theaters on October 6.
Follow us for more entertainment coverage on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.
Rating: 2/10
