All the films mentioned by name in Kim Newman's definitive encyclopedia of horror films, Nightmare Movies. Well worth a read.…
Exorcist II: The Heretic
It's four years later... what does she remember?
Bizarre nightmares plague Regan MacNeil four years after her possession and exorcism. Has the demon returned? And if so, can the combined faith and knowledge of a Vatican investigator and a hypnotic research specialist free her from its grasp?
As a sequel to The Exorcist? - Yes, it's a dismal failure.
Viewed as a stand-alone, loopy, mystical/sci-fi/horror hybrid dragged along by a manic Richard Burton performance? - It's actually quite fun.
Somehow I missed out on(avoided...) seeing this until very recently, but finally got my opportunity to view it on the big screen as part of the BFI's John Boorman retrospective.
Seen in a Boorman context alongside the likes of 'Excalibur' and 'Zardoz', it made a lot more sense to me than as a direct sequel to 'The Exorcist'.
I also think that my expectations had been dragged so low due to constant critical derision over the years, that anything - at least - watchable would've impressed somewhat.
What I found was a flawed, but entertaining oddity.
John Boorman makes a terrible sequel to the Exorcist but an excellent 'Italian' horror.
Satan has become an embarrassment to our progressive views.
Holy shit... what the hell is going on here? You get the feeling that director John Boorman and screenwriter William Goodhart never actually watched The Exorcist... or read the book... or the screenplay. Maybe someone told them what happens in the film, who heard it from someone else.
The film is stuck in this 1970s new age psychology which flies in the face of the original film that managed to feel steeped in old world mythology. I usually like it when a sequel or remake tries to do something different, but right from the start when Regan gets hypnotized and synced to her doctor... so they can share memories...…
Finally got around to seeing this much-maligned sequel to the Friedkin classic. Expectations were set to their lowest so this damp squib of a film could not anger me but its unfocused approach certainly was an effort to stay awake during.
It certainly makes me glad of all the good to great horror sequels we are getting now.
Sometimes a movie is so nonsensical, so embarrassingly diving off deep ends of logic that I am won back entirely by the nature of its existence as a mangled mutation, a sprawling massacre of potential mythology. In there are still some inspired visual flourishes. The guy falling off the cliff in off-putting slow motion is one of my favorite moments in anything. The movie is just so wrong on so many levels that I consume it as the true guiltiest of pleasures. I mean it, I truly feel guilty for enjoying it as much as I do. A good train wreck turns your head in the right way.
Listen, John Boorman:
You made Deliverance, you made Hell in the Pacific (yeah! Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune, that's right), you made Point fucking Blank.
What the fuck, man?
…is... is everything okay at home?
I was listening to the fantastic Morricone soundtrack earlier this week and I thought, "you know? I think I've reached the point where I could really enjoy Exorcist II."
I do really want to like it, though. It's very similar to The Visitor in how ridiculous it is, but The Visitor blows it away, mainly because The Visitor has stuff going on. Exorcist II does have some fun moments, like James Earl Jones in a locust costume spitting out an apple, that psychic machine, the "oh, I was possessed by a demon. Don't worry, he's gone now" line that seems to have been played completely straight, the wonderful Morricone score, and the climax that apes the climax of The…
In 1973 "The Exorcist" shocked the world. In 1977 "Exorcist II: The Heretic" gave the world a good laugh. Ever since its release "Exorcist II" has been on lists of all-time worst sequels and it is quite understandable why. The script is ridiculous beyond belief, the dialogues are absurd and it is in no way the masterpiece that its predecessor was.
There is no sense denying all that. However, let us look at "Exorcist II" from another point of view for a moment. Imagine you have just watched the original and you decide to turn in. You fall into a nightmare. It follows the story of Regan after the events of the first film.
Like all nightmares, there is no…
It was horrible, utterly horrible… and fascinating.
The fact the film existed in the first place was the first of many misguided, misjudged and ultimately poor choices. There's a laundry list of problems with the film but it's almost more fun to let other people witness it themselves. An incoherent, at times incompetent and generally dull film that only suffers even more as an inept piece of work when contrasted with the previous film.
Heilige Scheiße! Alle Beteiligten müssen vom Satan besessen gewesen sein, um ein solch schreckliches Machwerk auf die Menschheit los zu lassen. Selbst die wenigen effektiven Szenen werden durch grottigstes Schauspiel ansonsten ehrbarer Mimen komplett zum Teufel geschickt. Ein Albtraum, aber nicht so wie vom Zuschauer erhofft.
Terrible and that horrible music.
There is still sth. evil left in Regan and Richard Burton has to save the day...
A total mess. A plot that doesn't make a lick of sense. Richard Burton sleepwalking. Linda Blair being sexualized to the max. Lots of locusts.
Make or Break Scene: Everything happening after the first 15 minutes...
MVT: Burton and Blair who are at least tolerable.
Score: 3/ 10
USA Up All Night (also known as Up All Night and Up All Night with Rhonda Shear) is an American…
We're about half way through the Underrated Series and have finally reached one of the big genres. I'm expecting lots…