The Exorcist: Believer - Review Thread

So what did I appreciate about The Exorcist: Believer? Okay, let's start there. First of all, I think Leslie Odom, Jr. honestly does a good job as the emotional anchor of this film, and I really did buy into his performance as a father desperate to both save his daughter and understand what's happening to her. Building off that, I think the First Act does a fairly decent job of establishing everything and serving as a nice slow build. I can also at least say that co-writer/director David Gordon Green clearly understands what made The Exorcist tick and tries to replicate that...the degree to which, I'll get to in a minute...but at the very least, I can acknowledge that there were more than a few scenes throughout this thing that I found to be somewhat effective -- the climatic exorcism scene included, one or two things about it aside. One scene of violence, in particular, had me flinching away from the screen and audibly say "Nope! Nonono!" (which wasn't a problem, because I was the sole person in my 2:30 matinee showing on opening weekend), but that was more to do with me being very squeamish about a particular form of violence. And before the reported reshoots...I think Gordon Green DID have one or two ideas here that are interesting in theory, but maybe not so much in execution.

Let's talk about that execution, then. I mentioned how David Gordon Green tries to replicate the style of the original Exorcist, and I think he does an admirable job there in terms of recreation. But there comes a point where recreation turns into outright aping, which is something that The Exorcist: Believer is guilty of the more I think about it. It just outright copies a lot of the same beats on more than one occasion, which makes me think this movie is potentially more lazy than anything else. Especially when it comes to its portrayal of possession, it doesn't offer anything new or soul-chillingly creepy like the first one did. Now, in the climax, it attempts to add a little twist into the resolution, and I appreciated that in theory, like I said, but I ultimately don't think the film earns it in the end. Some more time devoted to developing the friendship between the two main girls would have made both this twist and the narrative as a whole more impactful overall. This film reportedly had ten minutes cut out of it, and I have to wonder if those ten minutes were devoted to said character development? And then there's the inclusion of Ellen Burstyn as Chris MacNeil, which...what a waste. The way the script uses her DOES feel like disrespect, and you could've cut her from this movie completely and it wouldn't have made any difference. At least 2018's Halloween gave Laurie Strode a purpose and an interesting emotional hook and wove her into the story. Here...well, this is a legacy sequel, so we need somebody from the original to be here. But getting back to the style for a moment, you know how I can sorta tell this movie had reshoots? Jumpscares. They may not be as prevalent/aggressive as they normally are in modern horror now, but this movie pretty much opens with one, and that sure stands out like a sore thumb amidst David Gordon Green's attempts to recreate the vibes of William Friedkin's film. I'm honestly glad Friedkin isn't here to see this.

But do I think The Exorcist: Believer is an insult to the original? Yes and no. Maybe. It's complicated. I personally still think Exorcist: The Beginning is the worst this franchise has to offer, and at the very least, Believer never bored me like Heretic did. And it starts out somewhat well, features a good Leslie Odom Jr. performance and has a few faint glimmers here and there. I'll tell you what, though...initially, I was more "mid" on this movie, but the more I think about it, the worse it gets. This franchise has certainly been possessed by something, and it needs its own exorcism to get the evil out.

*1/2 /****