GL84
Years after a traumatic event, a scarred priest joins an archaeological dig in Africa where the workers start experiencing strange traumas from a church buried in the sand and when it continues leads him to believe that evil has been unleashed and all of his faith is needed to fight it off.For the most part, there really wasn't a whole lot to like about this one. Among the few enjoyable aspects here is that the film does present evil in a very dignified manner, which is a stark contrast to the other types of films on the subject. It presents the manner in a manner that would actually be accustomed to, and it is relatable to most people. The devil manifesting itself in a human guise is an issue that must be dealt with on an individual basis, and the struggles provided are more realistic and human than in most of the other films. It's a great method of involving the viewer into the film that is greatly appreciated as this goes for such overt references to this situation and it's quite appealing. That is enhanced by the other outside forces keeping this one somewhat interesting as the forms of possession shown throughout here generate quite a strong first half which sets up the finale. That is the other good part about this as the film also has some great moments towards the end in the church from the attempted baptism and the eventual confrontation with the indigenous tribe which carries on into the final exorcism attempt at the end. Aside from these, though, there really wasn't a whole lot as there's a couple of things wrong. The biggest criticism is it's far too slow here as the story is intense, but nothing else is. This is a drama-centered story if there ever was one, and what makes it even worse is that it's a dull drama to begin with. Had this been made in the vein of being entertaining, then it could've worked but the overall presentation is boring and very slow to get going. This is an intense crime right there that severely and quite heavily knocks it down. Also not helping it is its storyline makes little sense. There is an attempt to explain everything, but it's buried behind so much incomprehensible psycho-babble that trying to get it out is almost impossible with the whole connection between the different forces. It had some rare moments of potential but quickly left that as if unable to think that it can carry it along and reverts back to the spiritual side of things that doesn't offer anything. and wasn't all that special to begin with. The other flaw is that the CGI in here is another disappointment, as it looks incredibly fake considering the rest of the film looks so good. It was told the creatures were supposed to be a threat, but there wasn't that much to them in order to be afraid of. These here are what hold this one down.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Language, children-in-danger and intense religious themes.
olly-pop
If you look this film up, you can read a wealth of information about how terrible the initial reviews were for it. It was re-released under 'Exorcist: The Beginning' which was essentially just a different edit and a desperate attempt to salvage the whole project. If you're a fan of the original 'The Exorcist' don't feel drawn towards this film as the two are unrelated. In fact, William Peter Blatty, the author/screenwriter of it, said that watching Exorcist: The Beginning was his "most humiliating professional experience." I love horror films and am totally open to anything low budget or a little odd. This is both with dire acting, scripting and special effects. I'm surprised it managed to reach the vote it did on IMDb and can only presume there are some very vocal die-hard fans out there. The film is poor in almost every way imaginable and my sincere advice, avoid like the plague!
Black-Fandango
In case you don't know the story with these movies, here it is: Morgan Creek films hired Paul Schrader to direct a prequel to The Exorcist, after director John Frankenheimer left the project, presumably due to health reasons. Schrader finished shooting, and presented a rough-cut to the studio. They hated it, and Schrader was fired shortly afterwords. Director Renny Harlin was brought on to make an entirely new film from a somewhat re-worked script, most of the same cast, and the same sets. His movie was released as Exorcist: The Beginning; it got terrible reviews, and was a box-office failure. After this, with some pressure from Schrader, and, I believe, an online petition, Morgan Creek gave Paul Schrader a minimal post-production budget to finish his film, and gave it a limited theatrical release as Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist.It's an interesting position for me to be in with these movies, because I am a fan of both directors. Both of them have made some of my favorite movies - I love Paul Schrader's sexualized Cat People remake, and Renny Harlin's The Long Kiss Goodnight is a shining example of a great dumb, but not stupid action movie - and they both have areas in which they excel. Though, it would be difficult to find two more different film-makers. Both movies focus on Father Lankester Merrin (Stellan Skarsgård, Max von Sydow's character from the original film), who is going through a crisis of faith (much like Father Damien Karras in The Exorcist) after an incident in a Holland village during World War II, where an SS officer forced Merrin to choose which ten people would be killed for the murder of a German soldier. Merrin is on an archaeological dig in Africa, when he uncovers a thousand year old Christian church which, unbeknownst to Merrin, was deliberately buried to trap the spirit of the demon Pazuzu (the chief antagonist of the Exorcist series).Both movies show the strengths and weaknesses of their respective directors. Schrader capably handles the dramatic and story driven scenes, but his film never really inspires any sense of dread, his climax lacks any real tension, and because of the low budget, the CGI effects are some of the worst in a feature film since that Dungeons and Dragons movie with Jeremy Irons. Thankfully, the CGI shots aren't that abundant. Renny Harlin, however, does give his film a more frightening atmosphere, and there are some scenes - particularly one involving assorted lepidoptera - which make you squirm. But, Harlin's character scenes all descend into clichés and histrionics, and he has an annoying habit of shooting too much of his scenes in close-up, which detracts from the drama. Both movies also feature cinematography by the great Italian cameraman Vittorio Storaro (The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Last Tango in Paris, Apocalypse Now) who's lighting you can literally almost feel on your body as look at it.All in all, even though it is a lesser horror movie than Exorcist: The Beginning, I have to give the edge to Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist. Both movies feature more drama than horror, which should automatically give favor to Schrader. Also, Dominion is simply closer in tone and spirit to the original film, which is something that any prequel/sequel/remake should strive for. However, I do recommend watching both movies, preferably back-to-back, as the experience does give one a unique insight into how much impact a director has on a film.Final ratings: Exorcist: The Beginning - ** (out of four) Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist - *** (out of four)
