We're about half way through the Underrated Series and have finally reached one of the big genres. I'm expecting lots…
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?
Part of the birthday movie marathon! Movie #5
I don't know what kind of drugs they were taking when they filmed this fiasco but I sure could have used some to numb the sharp pain of disappointment that came over me while viewing it!
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.
It might be better if you leave the sound and subtitles off.
First off, Boorman was cursed with an unduly bad script. The original film is openly offensive, savage, visceral and creepy; I can't think of a more shocking film up to that point in movie history. Exorcist II on the other hand, I'm not sure where the R rating came from, I don't even recall a character swearing not to mention the total lack of little girls bloodily masturbating with crucifixes. Beyond the scripts toothlessness though there's the problem that large swathes of this just don't make much sense. I found myself repeatedly making jumps in logic to explain tenuous character motivations and I felt a great deal of time was spent hammering in the bug stuff with almost no real satisfactory payoff theme-wise. Boorman concocted some good looking crazy here and there, but that's really the only thing in the pros column for this entry.
It started out bat shit crazy, then it got boring quick.
Every bit the boondoggle it's reported to be. The wonderful trailer makes it look like some 70s gonzo horror drug trip, and about 15 minutes of the movie are exactly that. The rest, unfortunately...
2 out of 5 (C)
Film makers should always bear in mind that scary is better than boring when it comes to horror movies.
The best thing about this pathetic follow-up to The Exorcist is without doubt Ennio Morricone's score. It's amazing that he went for this project, along with the likes of director Boorman, Richard Burton and Max von Sydow. Even Paul Henreid came along. Such a collective waste of talent.
Somewhat unfairly maligned Exorcist II: The Heretic is more interested in examining the concept of hypnosis than possession. It's not really a horror film, in any case not a scary one, and it's pretty far from great. Linda "fantastic as a demon, horrible as anything else" Blair's lack of talent causes it to at times turn into a heavily campy affair. But it has good qualities too -- for instance, even though it makes the film harder to follow, I quite like the messy nested structure and the hallucinatory atmosphere which, of all things, reminds me a bit of Resnais' masterful Providence. The use of flashing lights just before the end is a stroke of genius.
FUCK, THIS, SHIT. If you cherish your eyes I wouldn't watch this movie. It is the worst pile of shit of the face of the earth. It's not even worth watching just to check it out. Run hard and run fast.
KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!!!!
Probably the shittest thing I have ever seen. Linda Blair weTSEADRHetrh
USA Up All Night (also known as Up All Night and Up All Night with Rhonda Shear) is an American…
Horror movies are by far my favorite, so I've decided to make a list with all of them I remember…