My favorite of the series


As much as I loved The Exorcist ( and even enjoyed Heretic for the most part), I have to say this was my most favorite of all the Exorcist films made. It has the perfect mix of mystery, drama, horror and action, and the performances are all top notch. Whats great is the story: once it pulls you in, it never lets up until the very end. Very well done suspenseful moment (the hallway scene in particular), and it is the best scripted of all the films (dialogue was absolutely spot on in many scenes). So while I do enjoy all the films, Exorcist III is still my favorite film in the series.



"Its time to kick ass and chew bubblegum, and Im all outta gum." Duke Nukem

reply

I so wish this movie got as much love as The Exorcist in terms of DVD/Blu-ray release. I find, even though the first is the best, I like this movie more. It feels like a smaller story, compared to 1 and 2 but the stakes are raised to the next level. In the first film, the conflict is expulsion of a demon from a child. In this movie that same demon takes up residence in a hospital and allows a murderous spirit to possess or kill it's occupants and anyone else the Gemini deems fit. I like how this is an epilogue to the first film and acts like a "Where are they now" special. Blatty's writing just pulls me and doesn't let go.

reply

Also, due to the studio demand for a rewrite, we got Jason Miller back as Karras ... and we got Karras himself back, albeit tormented by the demon who "caught" him when he died. Only Karras' resuscitated body appears in the Legion novel. In the film, Karras still inhabits his body, along with the personality of the Gemini Killer, James Vennamun. This "ups the ante" because now it is Karras, the former rescuer of Regan MacNeil, who must now be rescued by Kinderman and Fr. Paul Morning.

reply

Not to mention the exorcist, Paul Morning himself. A lot of people object to this character, apparently because they don't like the exorcism. However, what Blatty did with this character is interesting. An exorcism and an exorcist-character were forced on Blatty, and I for one like what he did in response.

Morning is introduced to us first via his environment, namely the Georgetown University campus. Blatty shows us Dahlgren Chapel, with its lovely fountain, framed between two banks of campus buildings. The building on the right had served as Damien Karras' residence hall in the Friedkin film. This is the scene where Kinderman and Karras walk past the Chapel and pause in front of the residence building, and where Kinderman mock-threatens to "deport" Karras. We then see a smiling Karras turn to enter the residence.

Morning's room is located directly across the Chapel courtyard (in the left bank of buildings) from Karras' former residence, which can be seen from Morning's window.

So, by this time, the audience's memory is jogged, and fans made nostalgic by, the familiar settings.

Then Blatty shows bits and pieces of Morning's room - simple items indicative of his sanctity, such as an immaculate sink and hairbrush, a Rosary, a photo of Morning, presumably as an infant posed with his parents, a miniature of St. Michael slaying Satan ... and a lively little bird in a box on the window sill whose injured wing Morning has patched up.

Then we see Morning at his desk, presumably reading his Breviary, only to be distracted by the bird's sudden cessation of chirping. Drawn to the window, Morning is followed by Blatty's camera - actually it's Morning's shadow, which falls across his wall plaque which reads, "What we give to the poor is what we take with us when we die", a holy saying that was imprinted on an old miniature calendar card that Fr. Lankester Merrin had carried in his wallet. Which of course reminds us - at least readers of the original novel - of the other great exorcist, Merrin, and his own simplicity and sanctity. It is notable that Blatty's camera follows Morning's walk to the window just as Friedkin followed Merrin walking up to the blacksmith's shop where he sees the one-eyed craftsman.

It seems clear that, as "senior exorcist" - who, like Merrin, has had a harrowing exorcistic experience in which "his hair turned white overnight" - Blatty has invested Morning with Merrin-like qualities, which of course resonate well with the first book and the Friedkin film.

Arriving at the window, Morning finds the bird suddenly lifeless and already rigid with death.

Immediately following the discovery, a crucifix falls off the wall. A closeup reveals that the crucifix is bleeding while lying there on the floor. Morning picks it up and sees the blood.

Directly after that, the air turns dark as if with a sudden overcast of storm clouds, and then - as with the case of Merrin in Iraq when confronting the Pazuzu statue - what I like to call "the Pazuzu Wind" begins to blow through the room. Morning is left alone in the windy darkness, with a dawning, Merrin-like recognition that "soon he would face an ancient enemy".

Remarkably, this scene is lyrical because it is entirely wordless. Morning has even less dialogue than Merrin in Iraq - in fact he has no dialogue. It is all up to Blatty's camera to give us a character portrait of Fr. Paul Morning and his nemesis in perhaps a mere two minutes of film. A major success, and a tribute to the original story, even though an artificial add-on due to studio demands.

This scene, plus a couple others, as well as some distinct elements help make this flawed film one of my perennial favorites.

reply

Sorry, I didn't see The Heretic because I heard it was awful but I'm really tempted to say that I liked this one more than the original Exorcist film and here's why: the pacing was far better. The first film, as spectacular as it was....was a little slow at some points. I appreciate the "slow burning" atmosphere of some horror films, but it didn't work with The Exorcist. I was spacing out during a few scenes and that's not good, especially when you want your audience to be chilled during every second. Which brings me to another point: the original film wasn't scary to me. Was it shocking? Absolutely. But scary? No....not really. Now maybe it's because I'm somewhat desensitized to horror films now, but I was not effectively spooked by the original Exorcist film.

So with that said, The Exorcist III was much better when it came to the scare factor. It had more scenes that just scared the pants right off of me (the hallway scene in the hospital is the one that everyone remembers) but the outstanding performance of Brad Dourif as the Gemini killer alone was enough to make the film worth watching for me. But the film doesn't stop there: I loved the dream sequence with Kinderman. It was both realistic enough that we, the audience could get a comfortable hold on what was going on, but still crazy enough that we know that we're looking into someone's dream. The clever foreshadowing of Father Dyer's death where he's playing cards with the angel of death and then they have that hair-raising exchange of words:
"Now I wonder if we're both having the same dream."
"No, Bill. I'm not dreaming."

But the scene that really had me on the edge of my seat was when Kinderman realizes that his daughter is going to be the next target of the Gemini Killer and then there's that mad car chase scene (a moment of silence for that poor actor who had to endure George C. Scott yelling in his ear while trying to drive a car through a crowded city) and then that scene with the nurse, my god. I haven't been that tense during a film in a long time. The film in general really shattered my expectations and I'd watch it again for sure.

reply

There's quite a bit more comedy than I expected too but appropriately stops once things become serious

reply

I just saw the Exorcist III this week and i like it better than the first or second Exorcist movies.

reply

I liked the first one slightly better, but this is the best sequel by far.

reply

[deleted]

I like the way Blatty returned to Georgetown for a lot of the shooting - the familiar landmarks, especially the old MacNeil house, the campus, and the Hitchcock Steps served to connect this film with the Friedkin film and Blatty's original Exorcist novel...

reply