ARROW IN THE HEAD REVIEWS

001617
Search by title # A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Exorcist 2: The Heretic (1977)
Written by: The Arrow
Director: John Boorman

Starring:
Linda Blair/Regan
Richard Burton/Father Lemont
Louise Fletcher/Dr. Gene
Max Von Sydow/Father Merrin
PLOT-CRUNCH
Regan (Blair) is now a hot teen and she’s under the care of some shrink (Fletcher). Father Lemont (Burton) is assigned the task to investigate father Merrin’s death (from the first) and that of course leads him to Regan. Mind melding gadgets are brought out, lots of "Pazuzu" mumbo jumbo and then its off to Africa we go! What the hell is going on???
THE LOWDOWN
Ok…where’s the camera? This is a joke right, somebody’s putting me on! This can’t be the sequel to the great Exorcist…sadly it is. This film is an incoherent mess. Yes I do admire a sequel that doesn’t copy the original but this one goes too far.

Where do I begin? Is it the silly mind melding devices that they use? (I won’t even begin on how that thing works) Is it the revealing of the demon’s identity? (he’s a giant, flying grasshopper named Pazuzu) Is it all the African bull crap they toss our way? Is it the atrocious dialogue, ("I traveled this route before, on the wings of a demon"- "She has evolved to resist the brushing of the wings!"…what???) the putrid acting or the snore-inspiring screenplay? It’s all of it and then some.

I can’t cut around it, this film sucks the big one.

At least if the film made sense it maybe could’ve been bearable but this puppy is on drugs. Why does Regan feel pain when Father Lemont does? Why do pigeons always surround Reagan? Why is that tap dancing sequence even in the film? Why is Dr Gene the only doctor in the house? Why does Burton stretch the word evillll? Why are Regan’s tits always on display? (bras didn’t exist in 77?) Is it my dirty mind or did Regan and the doc have a lesbo thang going on? Why is there two Regan’s in the end? And why does the police wait until everybody leaves the house to swarm all over it? (Hilarious)?

The basic storyline is just a bad idea. It tries to expand on the story set up in the first one, too bad the original said it all: Regan’s a normal girl possessed by a demon…period. This whole Regan is a force of a good, the demon is a god of the air named Pazuzu thang is for the birds and just not interesting.

The film clearly runs away from horror (rumor has it that Boorman hated the original, he thought it was disgusting) and embraces some kind of new-wave, spiritual, artsy fartsy direction that maybe made sense to the director but that left my horror loving butt in the dust.

This film is just a non-scary insult to a horror classic. Some of the visuals are nice, I’ll give the film that but it’s far from enough to compensate for the pain I had to sit through while viewing this shite. The guy that directed "Deliverance" helmed this turd??? Maybe he needs to be exorcised…
GORE
None that I can remember but we get lots of shots of flying insects.
ACTING
Busty Linda Blair (Regan) is on and off and she’s very sexy. Richard Burton (Father Lemont) thinks he’s William Shatner...that’s bad. How Louise Fletcher (Gene) managed to remain credible in this drivel is beyond me. Max Von Sydow (Father Merrin) does what he has to do…not much. Kitty Winn (Sharon) does ok, too bad I didn’t care about her. James Earl Jones (Kokumo) makes an ass of himself. Loved that grasshopper costume dude.
T & A
Linda Blair is all growns up and shows off her body in lots of see-thru blouses…thank you.
DIRECTING
Boorman, shame on you! Yes, you do manage to give this stinker some visual flair here and there but just because you didn’t like the original Exorcist that doesn’t mean you have the right to torture us with this sequel! The film’s lack of quality made me oblivious to any of the good things Boorman might have put in there.
SOUNDTRACK
A kitschy score. But the worst is that bumblebee song they play during the grasshopper flight. ANNOYING!!!!
BOTTOM LINE
This film is possessed. Boorman runs away from the feel of the first one and instead delivers a pseudo psychological pile of crap, filled with imagery that I just DIDN’T want to understand. I will not put all the blame on Boorman, William Goodhart (the screenwriter) should be spanked too. No wonder he hardly ever worked again. It might be that this sequel is one of the most misunderstood films to ever grace our screens. But in my book of blood this flick doesn’t deserve the effort to comprehend. What’s an "Heretic" anyways….WHO CARES!
BULL'S EYE
Exorcist 2 exists in at least three versions. The original version was 117 minutes long and was recut by director John Boorman the day after the premiere into a 110 minutes version (the audience booed, laughed and threw shit at the screen), the one released theatrically Major differences include the addition of a recap of the events of the first film through narration and freeze frame.

Using stock shots of Linda Blair from the first film for the climax (all new shots of Regan possessed were done by a double because Linda Blair refused to have the possession makeup done on her again) and an alternate ending where Richard Burton's character is killed (In the original version, he runs off with Regan to help her be a force of good).

The European version is also purported to be different. For a long time, only the recut version of Exorcist 2 was available for TV, cable and on video. Recently, the original 117-minutes cut has found it's way to video and recent TNT airings.
Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

8:38PM on 10/12/2010

An mess of a film yet it is fascinating.

"The Exorcist 2:The Heretic" is certainly an visual mess of some good story ideals and special effects.

Director John Boorman certainly did his best with an so-so film. Linda Blair is cute in the movie but she can`t carry the movie. Richard Burton looks lost at times, he has the worst dialogue in the film. Only Oscar-Winner:Louise Fletcher gives an memorable performance.

Max Von Sydow`s role in the movie didn`t help at all and so goes to James Earl Jones (Which both actors are truly
"The Exorcist 2:The Heretic" is certainly an visual mess of some good story ideals and special effects.

Director John Boorman certainly did his best with an so-so film. Linda Blair is cute in the movie but she can`t carry the movie. Richard Burton looks lost at times, he has the worst dialogue in the film. Only Oscar-Winner:Louise Fletcher gives an memorable performance.

Max Von Sydow`s role in the movie didn`t help at all and so goes to James Earl Jones (Which both actors are truly wasted here).

"The Exoricst 2:The Heretic" is at least visually interesting at times. But those moments can`t beat the unintentional funny moments of the feature. Despite Oscar-Winner:Martin Scorsese is a fan of this movie!

"The Exorcist 2:The Heretic" is a good and bad movie at the same time. An rarity.
Your Reply:



12:24PM on 10/30/2006

Mr. Movies?

Wow, I didn't think I'd encounter anyone who would defend this film! I have tried several times to give this film a fair chance; no, a REALLY fair chance, and I just can't stop marvelling at how it fails at every level. Despite a remarkable cast (Richard Burton, James Earl Jones, etc.), the acting is stiff, at best. The story is a jumbled mess. I tried my best to figure out just what this screenplay is trying to say, but my advice is give up - its jibberish. Oh, okay, its good vs evil.
Wow, I didn't think I'd encounter anyone who would defend this film! I have tried several times to give this film a fair chance; no, a REALLY fair chance, and I just can't stop marvelling at how it fails at every level. Despite a remarkable cast (Richard Burton, James Earl Jones, etc.), the acting is stiff, at best. The story is a jumbled mess. I tried my best to figure out just what this screenplay is trying to say, but my advice is give up - its jibberish. Oh, okay, its good vs evil. Isn't every horror movie?

Here is what I think went wrong. Check out the beginning of the original Exorcist and you will see that although she is cute, Linda Blair can't act. Cut to this sequel, and the main problem is that it counts on Linda Blair to carry significant portions of the movie, and she just can't do it.

Arrow mentioned the mind melding device, but it is worth a more in depth look here. This device allows people to go into each other's minds and memories - in short, the greatest invention ever! What does this movie do with it? Makes a light go "boop, boop, boop" while actors say stupid things like "come down to my level". Then, Richard Burton jumps in and says something stupid like "I can reach her" and throws on the head gear and is immediately into a dream where two Regans are grabbing at Louise Fletcher's boob. Classic!

What a mess!
Your Reply:



9:42PM on 08/08/2005

Wouldn't exactly call it a sequel

John Boorman did not intend to make The Exorcist over again. This is both what Warner Bros. wanted, and the fans wanted. Such a film wouldn't have been half as good or successful. Boorman instead takes a different approach. This film isn't scary. IT WASN'T MEANT TO BE! In interviews and such, Boorman was making a film about good (contrasting to Friedkin's 1973 film). Aside from several bouts of bad dialouge and subpar editing, this is a good, if different, film. Of course, this is not the kind
John Boorman did not intend to make The Exorcist over again. This is both what Warner Bros. wanted, and the fans wanted. Such a film wouldn't have been half as good or successful. Boorman instead takes a different approach. This film isn't scary. IT WASN'T MEANT TO BE! In interviews and such, Boorman was making a film about good (contrasting to Friedkin's 1973 film). Aside from several bouts of bad dialouge and subpar editing, this is a good, if different, film. Of course, this is not the kind of movie you watch w/ beer or Mind Altering Substances, and you have to pay attention.

Richard Burton is not under the impression that he's William Shatner. The popular belief is that he says [link] That's a gross overstatement. The reason he says it that way is it's part of his accent.

Pazuzu was a character in Blatty's original novel, it wasn't introduced for this sequel. it makes sense, seeing as how the Devil would want to do this, but is too busy. So, he deputizes Pazuzu.

The two areas where this film most clearly shines is shot is direction and music. The film is Beautiful to look at, and Ennio Morricone (he did the Sergio leone pictures, and DANGER: DIABOLIK) gives out a score that ranges from creepy (The Opening Theme) to Beautiful (Regan's Theme).

Take into acount the bad, but see it anyway. It's a good movie if you don't expect Linda Blair masturbating with a cross.
Your Reply:



Mistress Of The Week

More
Palvin, Barbara