The year 1977 strikes again! Is the third time the charm?
Well, this was once deemed the 'second worst Film of all time,' so I'm going with 'No.'
This is Exorcist II- The Heretic, the Sequel that nobody wanted any part of that wasn't an Executive at Warner Bros.
The Director- out.
The Writer- out.
Ellen Burstyn- out.
They got Linda Blair by, allegedly, making a good Script and then spending the whole Production time rewriting into what we got here.
The Plot is, oh boy, something else. In the time since her Exorcism, Regan has seemingly-repressed her memories of that night and just wants to move on with her life. A Priest- Richard Burton- is called in to investigate the Priest from that Exorcism and meets her.
They begin to experiment with parapsychology, which is a really bad idea. Something something Locusts and something something Pazuzu returns.
Were The Golden Turkey Awards, right? To find out, read on...
Burton- who allegedly took the role if the Studio would then cast him in
Equus- is sent to investigate Father Merrin, who is retconed into being all about metaphysics and the World joining into a uni-mind.
Seriously, did that come up in THE Exorcist?
The other story is that Burton did this as a 'pay for a divorce' Film. You decide which reason is better.
He meets up with Regan, who claims to not remember anything about the Exorcism.
The head Doctor- the late Louise Fletcher- has a way to help them both...
A 'synchronizer' allows her to join minds with Regan and see the night in question.
Screenwriting Tip- redo the finale of your last Film to remind the audience of that (better) Film and to reuse Actors whose characters are dead.
This is also not Blair in make-up, since she, understandably, didn't want to do that again!
The Film gives you some very weird visuals to, which makes up for the otherwise slow pacing and meandering nature of the Film.
Hey look- it's a Double Regan. What does that mean?!?
The Film leans *really* heavily on this stuff as the effect of it is shown on Regan as Pazuzu begins to force his influence on her. That and her joining minds with the Father...since, why not.
The Film tries to make a dramatic Scene where she is affected...while tap dancing at a Show.
Horror!
The Father- see above- links to Pazuzu and those affected by it/him in Africa in the past. They are a swarm of locusts, which is both literal and metaphorical
all at once.
It involves a man- James Earl Jones- who was once possessed by the Spirit but was exorcised.
This brought Father Merrin to him.
Just to note: Jones was heard, but not seen in the first Star Wars in 1977. He was seen in this.
Since Blair was still turning down the make-up, Pazuzu fully possesses her...with glowing eyes.
Can the new Father save her?
Can this methodical Film come to a big, satisfying climax?
Well, a Townhouse collapses- because Demon- so...I guess so.
Regan's Caretaker- subbing for her Mom, since Burstyn turned this down-dies and she leaves with the Priest. I smell a sitcom...and zero follow-up.
The End.
A weird mashup of Genres that probably won't fully satisfy anyone. If you're the Director and/or Writer, you'll say that you 'didn't give the Audience what they wanted.' If you are the Audience, you'd say that you should *allegedly* throw stuff at the screen.
I was never that mad. Besides, it was my TV- why would I ruin it?!?
The Film is an attempt to do something different, for better or worse. Some Critics felt that the first Film 'exploited Blair' for Horror. I think the bulk of Critics felt that this Film 'exploited her for a confusing Movie.'
Ironically, the genesis of rushing this Film out was to compete with stuff like The Omen. No chance of that happening with the focus on Parapsychology, a World Mind and all of those damn Locusts. Seriously, those things are both a literal threat and a metaphorical one- that's so lazy!
The Acting is mostly quite strong, even if some of the people- like Jones- are handicapped by the silliness around them (and how they dress). Von Sydow is a nice addition and Fletcher is always good. Burton is kind of a mixed bag, which makes sense if you consider half of the stories about him at this time. Blair does her best here too, honestly.
If the Film was its own Story and not a Sequel to 'the scariest Film of all time,' it would probably be both less and better remembered. It is not the 2nd worst Film of all time, not even in 1980 when the Book was written.
One last question- does anyone actually have this Book?
Next up, it seems like a logical thing to wrap up this Series, no? All I've got left is the *other* cut of the Prequel.
Fortunately, a young man of a lower Station (Dev Patel) is given a promotion by King Arthur.
He makes his one cut- a swing at the Green Knight's neck.
The year goes by quickly for the now-famous young Knight. He secretly fears the passage of time, of course.
If he can survive the journey, what will happen when he and the Green Knight meet again?
A visually amazing Film with a Plot about as dense as you'd expect from an adaptation of Arthurian Lore. It is chock full of grandiose dialog and monologues.
.jpg)
