Henry T. from ROCK CITY, IL Reviewed on 9/22/2009...
This movie is cool!!!!!!
2 of 3 member(s) found this review helpful.
Exorcist: The Beginning (...And Hopefully The End).
Caesar M. Warrington | Lansdowne, PA United States | 12/12/2005
(2 out of 5 stars)
"Enough already! THE EXORCIST is one of the greatest horror flicks ever made and all of these sequels, prequels... they will always come up short in comparison.
I don't know what to make of EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING. I didn't hate it but I didn't particularly like it either. Is it a mystery-thriller? Is it a "sand & desert" action-adventure flick, with British troops pitted against African natives? Or perhaps it's an old fashioned story of love from a distance? I don't know. But it's certainly not a horror flick.
On the plus side, Stellan Skarsgard gives a great performance.
The Exorcist IV: We Will Scare You To Death If You Watch Ano
Steven Hedge | Somewhere "East of Eden" | 10/30/2006
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Chad had earlier given another great synopsis of this last entry into the world of Pazuzu. You might want to read any of his reviews just to get a good understanding of what went on in the movies he's reviewed.
I do not disagree with him on this one as far as the quality of the film. This film is a mess. I always wanted to know what the previous meeting between Father Merrin and Pazuzu was like based off of the hints given us in the original Exorcist film, but this shallow film did little for me. I think Kat's review is on the money with this flick. If it wasn't for the good performance Stellan Skarsgard, playing Father Merrin, I would give this film a zero. I wonder what the author of the original story thinks (or would think if he's dead) how this prequel was handled. Only in his mind would we really know how Father Merrin really battled Pazuzu."
At first...promising; disappointing finish!
Anonymous | San Francisco, CA | 03/23/2005
(2 out of 5 stars)
"Perhaps much like the bulk of the reviewers here, I'm a die-hard fan of the 1973 original 'Exorcist' which contributed to many sleepless nights at my young age. Each sequel (or, now, prequel) that has emerged has, of course, piqued my interest to witness the progression of the movie series. Unfortunately, each subsequent movie has not lived up to the brilliance of the first release, and the newest creation ('Exorcist: The Beginning') is no exception.
I was not able to see the new release in the theaters, so I waited for the DVD, all the while avoiding specific reviews which revealed "spoilers" of the movie. However, I had stumbled upon a variety of glances from time to time, most of which spat out negative reviews. So, I prepared for the worst and expected a disaster.
Interestingly enough, I found myself actually ENJOYING the film about an hour into it! Up to about that time, it is a well-groomed horror movie with an intriguing plot (despite the AWFUL computerized graphics - more on that later). The idea that an ancient church was built over, yet, another ancient church used for human sacrifice and Satanic rituals was downright cool (and scary)! There were some highly graphic scenes, all which illustrated the hightened tension of the "emerging evil" eminating from the African setting. However, the movie took a tremendous turn for the worse in the awful (shall I say, ludicrous) exorcism finale. Dominated by bad make-up, a weak demonic voice, and disasterous CGI graphics, the exorcism scene outlines Hollywood's piss-poor attempts to frighten us with bad technology. It was tasteless, executed poorly and didn't even really make sense in the grand scheme of the movie.
Here's the scoop, folks: The most frightening part of the original 'Exorcist' is the "real" production of that movie. All stunts were done by hand (or with string), there were no computerized graphics, no sudden "surprise" frights, and the most enduring feature is the lack of music throughout the entire movie - THAT's what makes it frightening. These simple characteristics draw the movie-goers into the movie, as if it's really happening or as you're "really there." Think of any major disaster in history. Was there a big orchestra playing on TV as we watched the horror unfold on September 11th, 2001? No, and though music plays a huge part of movies (see "Tubular Bells" in the original), proper timing of effects, music, etc...is all a major part of the impact. This is a big part of what angers me about current horror movies. Everything is based on the "big production" and not what the STORY is about. As usual, this movie suffers greatly from the current "scare-them-with-technology" point of view.
Rumors are swirling around Exorcist fan-sites about the DVD release of Paul Schrader's 1st version of 'Exorcist: The Beginning.' Apparently, this version is a more intellegent, more accurate depiction of the first encounter of our ol' friend Pazuzu and Father Merrin. I'll certainly hold out to witness the release of that version. However, any movie released with two story lines is certainly not befitted to be considered a classic (such as 'The Exorcist' itself). Wouldn't you say?"
Sappho | Florida | 03/06/2005
(4 out of 5 stars)
"I have to admit that I was pretty skeptical about watching this movie, and have to confess that I never liked the original Exorcist. I always have bad reviews about these movies because they look false or don't have a real storyline, but this movie really impressed me. Stellan Skarsgård gives a strong performance, in my opinion, as Father Merrin, with a good supporting cast to back him up. Though quite gory at times, the movie keeps you interested, and the end has a nice twist. Overall, I enjoyed the movie and would recommend it to anyone interested in The Exorcist movies series."