Exorcist 3 Full Movie Online
Home » Movies-Year » 1990 » The Exorcist 3 (1990) Full Movie Watch Online Free The Exorcist 3 (1990) Full Movie Watch Online Free April 6, 2017 Movie24k 1990, Drama, English, HD, Hollywood Movies, Hollywood Movies 1990, Horror, Mystery No Comment.
| The Exorcist III | |
|---|---|
| Directed by | William Peter Blatty |
| Produced by |
|
| Screenplay by | William Peter Blatty |
| Based on | Legion by William Peter Blatty |
| Starring | |
| Music by | Barry De Vorzon |
| Cinematography | Gerry Fisher |
| Edited by | |
Production company | |
| Distributed by | 20th Century Fox |
Release date | |
Running time | 110 minutes[1] |
| Country | United States |
| Language | English |
| Budget | $11 million |
| Box office | $39 million |
The Exorcist III is a 1990 American horror film written and directed by William Peter Blatty. It is the third installment in the Exorcist franchise and an adaptation of Blatty's Exorcist novel Legion (1983). It stars George C. Scott, Ed Flanders, Jason Miller, Scott Wilson and Brad Dourif.
Despite its title, The Exorcist III is set 17 years after the original film and ignores the events of Exorcist II: The Heretic. It follows a character from the first film, Lieutenant William F. Kinderman, who investigates a series of demonic murders in Georgetown that have the hallmarks of the Gemini, a deceased serial killer. Blatty based aspects of the Gemini Killer on the real-life Zodiac Killer,[2] one of several serial killers who enjoyed the original Exorcist.[3][4][5]
Blatty, who wrote the original Exorcist novel (1971) and the screenplay for its 1973 film adaptation, conceived The Exorcist III with Exorcist director William Friedkin attached to direct. When Friedkin left the project, Blatty adapted the script into a bestselling novel, Legion (1983); Morgan Creek Productions bought the film rights, with Blatty as director. To Blatty's frustration, Morgan Creek demanded extensive last-minute changes, including the addition of an exorcism sequence for the climax.[6] Though some of the original footage appears permanently lost, Scream Factory released a 'director's cut' closer to Blatty's vision in 2016, with footage assembled from various sources.[7][8]
Following the critical and commercial failure of Exorcist II: The Heretic, The Exorcist III received mixed reviews and made modest returns at the box office.[9]
- 3Production
- 4Release
Plot[edit]
Lieutenant William F. Kinderman (George C. Scott) investigates the murder of a 12-year-old boy named Thomas Kintry. Kinderman later takes his friend Father Dyer (Ed Flanders) out to see It's a Wonderful Life. Kinderman is informed of a second murder- a priest who was decapitated. Dyer is subsequently hospitalized and found murdered in his room the following day, with the words 'IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE', written on the wall in his blood.
The fingerprints at the crime scenes do not match, indicating a different person was responsible for each. Kinderman reveals to the hospital staff that the murders fit the modus operandi of serial killer James 'The Gemini' Venamun (Brad Dourif), who was executed seventeen years prior.
Kinderman visits the head of the psychiatric ward, Dr. Temple (Scott Wilson), who relates the history of one of his patients. The patient was found wandering aimlessly seventeen years ago with amnesia. He was locked up, catatonic until recently when he became violent and claimed to be the Gemini Killer. Kinderman sees that the patient is his old friend Father Damien Karras. (Jason Miller) Karass' form appears to briefly change into that of the Gemini Killer. He expresses ignorance of Father Karras, but boasts of killing Father Dyer.
That night, a nurse is murdered and Dr. Temple commits suicide. Kinderman returns to see Karras, who once again changes into the Gemini Killer. The Gemini Killer explains that he is being aided by a 'Master'- the same entity who had previously possessed Regan MacNeil. The 'Master' was furious at being exorcised by Karras, and is exacting its revenge by using Karras' body as a conduit for the Gemini Killer's spirit to continue his killing spree. Each evening, the soul of the Gemini leaves the body of Karras and possesses the other patients elsewhere in the hospital, using them to commit the murders. The Gemini Killer also reveals he had forced Dr. Temple to bring Kinderman to him.
The Gemini possesses an old woman, and attempts to murder Kinderman and his family at their home, but the attack abruptly ends when Father Paul Morning (Nicol Williamson) arrives at the hospital and begins to perform an exorcism on Karras. The Gemini's 'Master' intervenes, taking over Karras' body, and Morning is severely wounded and mutilated. Kinderman rushes back to the hospital and attempts to euthanize Karras after finding Morning's body. The possessed Karras then torments and attempts to kill Kinderman. Father Morning manages to regain consciousness and tells Karras to fight the Gemini. Karras briefly regains control of his body and orders Kinderman to shoot him. Kinderman shoots Karras, killing him and freeing him from the Gemini Killer's spirit.
Later, Kinderman watches on as Karras' body is buried.
Cast[edit]
- George C. Scott as Lt. William F. Kinderman
- Ed Flanders as Father Dyer
- Jason Miller as Patient X/Damien Karras
- Scott Wilson as Dr. Temple
- Brad Dourif as James Venamun/The 'Gemini Killer'
- Grand L. Bush as Sgt. Atkins
- Nicol Williamson as Father Morning
- Nancy Fish as Nurse Allerton
- Tracy Thorne as Nurse Amy Keating
- Barbara Baxley as Shirley
- Harry Carey Jr. as Father Kanavan
- George DiCenzo as Stedman
- Tyra Ferrell as Nurse Blaine
- Lois Foraker as Nurse Merrin
- Don Gordon as Ryan
- Mary Jackson as Mrs. Clelia
- Zohra Lampert as Mary Kinderman
- Ken Lerner as Dr. Freedman
- Viveca Lindfors as Nurse X
- Lee Richardson as University President
- Fabio (uncredited) as Angel
- Patrick Ewing as Angel of Death
- C. Everett Koop as himself
- Larry King as himself
- Colleen Dewhurst as a voice of Pazuzu
- Samuel L. Jackson as Blind Dream Man
Production[edit]
Development[edit]
William Peter Blatty, who wrote the original Exorcist novel and the screenplay for its film adaptation, initially had no desire to write a sequel. However, he eventually came up with a story titled Legion, featuring Lieutenant Kinderman, a prominent character in the original Exorcist novel (though he played a minor role in the eventual film), as the protagonist.[10] Blatty conceived Legion as a feature film with William Friedkin, director of The Exorcist, attached to direct. Despite the critical and commercial failure of the previous sequel, Warner Bros. was keen to proceed with Blatty and Friedkin's plans for another Exorcist film. Blatty said that 'everybody wanted Exorcist III.. I hadn't written the script, but I had the story in my head..and Billy [Friedkin] loved it.' Friedkin, however, soon left the project due to conflicting opinions between him and Blatty on the film.[10]
The project went into development hell, and Blatty wrote Legion as a novel instead, published in 1983. It was a bestseller. Blatty then decided to turn the book back into a screenplay. Film companies Morgan Creek and Carolco both wanted to make the film; Blatty decided upon Morgan Creek after Carolco suggested the idea of a grown-up Regan MacNeil giving birth to possessed twins.[10] Blatty offered directorial responsibilities to John Carpenter, who liked his script; however, Carpenter backed out when it became clear that Blatty wanted to direct the movie himself and also because of creative differences regarding the ending of the movie. However, they remained friends. As per the stipulations for his deal with Morgan Creek, Blatty was to direct the movie himself, and it was to be filmed on location in Georgetown.[10]
Casting[edit]
The central role of Lt. Kinderman had to be recast, as Lee J. Cobb, who played the part in The Exorcist, had died in 1976. Oscar-winner George C. Scott signed up for the role, impressed by Blatty's screenplay: 'It's a horror film and much more.. It's a real drama, intricately crafted, with offbeat interesting characters..and that's what makes it genuinely frightening.'[10]
Several cast members from Blatty's previous film The Ninth Configuration (1980) appear in The Exorcist III: Jason Miller, reprising the role of Father Damien Karras from The Exorcist (billed only as 'Patient X' in the end credits); Ed Flanders, taking on the role of Father Dyer (previously played by William O'Malley); Nicol Williamson and Scott Wilson.
There are also cameo appearances by basketball players Patrick Ewing, John Thompson, model Fabio, ex-Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, television host Larry King, and an early appearance by Samuel L. Jackson in a dream sequence.
Zohra Lampert, who plays Kinderman's wife, is remembered for her lead role in another horror film, 1971's Let's Scare Jessica to Death.
Filming[edit]
With an $11 million budget, the tentatively-titled Exorcist: Legion was shot on location in Georgetown for eight weeks in mid-1989. Additional interior filming took place in DEG Studios in Wilmington, North Carolina.[10] Blatty completed principal photography of the film on time, and only slightly over budget. However, four months later, Morgan Creek informed Blatty that a new ending had to be shot. Blatty said that 'James Robinson, the owner of the company, his secretary had insisted to him that this has nothing to do with The Exorcist. There had to be an exorcism.'[10] 20th Century Fox put up an additional $4-million in post-production to film an effects-laden exorcism sequence featuring Nicol Williamson as Father Morning, a character added just for the new climax. Blatty had to make the best of it in the narrative while racing to complete the film. Blatty confirmed that when the possessed Karras speaks in an asexual voice, saying, 'I must save my son, the Gemini', that this in fact is either a returned Pazuzu or, as Blatty put it, 'Old Scratch himself' taking control. This ties into the revelation earlier in the film that the Gemini was sent into Karras' body as revenge for the Regan MacNeil exorcism. The altered voice in the climax is deliberately similar to that of Mercedes McCambridge, who did the uncredited voice of the demon in The Exorcist, and the role is essayed in The Exorcist III by Colleen Dewhurst, who was uncredited (actress Dewhurst was twice married to, and twice divorced from, actor George C. Scott).
One shot missing from the re-filmed climax - but which appears in the trailer - shows Karras/the Gemini 'morphing' through a variety of faces. It was left out of the film because Blatty was not happy with the special effects work.
On the climactic exorcism scene, Blatty later said, 'It's all right, but it's utterly unnecessary and it changes the character of the piece'.[10] Although at the time, Blatty told the press that he was happy to re-shoot the film's ending and have the story climax with a frenzy of special effects. Apparently this compromise was forced on Blatty against his wishes:
The original story that I sold [Morgan Creek] (and that I shot) ended with Kinderman blowing away Patient X. There was no exorcism. But it was a Mexican stand-off between me and the studio. I was entitled to one preview, then they could go and do what they wanted with the picture. They gave me a preview but it was the lowest end preview audience I have ever seen in my life. They dragged in zombies from Haiti to watch this film. It was unbelievable. But I decided, better I should do it than anyone else. I foolishly thought: I can do a good exorcism, I'll turn this pig's ear into a silk purse. So I did it.[10]
Working on the film, Brad Dourif recalls 'We all felt really bad about it. But Blatty tried to do his best under very difficult circumstances. And I remember George C. Scott saying that the folks would only be satisfied if Madonna came out and sang a song at the end!'[11] Dourif feels that 'The original version was a hell of a lot purer and I liked it much more. As it stands now, it's a mediocre film. There are parts that have no right to be there'.[6]
The execution-style ending that Blatty pitched to the studio - which was in the shooting script and actually filmed - differs radically from the ending of both the novel and the first screenplay adaption developed from the novel.[12] The novel ends with the Gemini Killer summoning Kinderman to his cell for a final speech and then willingly dropping dead after his alcoholic, abusive father, a Christian evangelist, dies a natural death from a heart attack. As his motive for killing was always to shame his father, the Gemini's reason for remaining on Earth no longer exists and he kills Karras in order to leave his host body. In Blatty's original screenplay adaptation, the ending is similar to the novel except that the Gemini's death is not self-induced but forced supernaturally and suddenly by the death of his father. In both novel and early screenplay, the Gemini's motives for his murders are also given further context via a long series of flashbacks which portray his and his brother's childhood and their relationship with their father.
Release[edit]
The Exorcist III was first released in October 1989 in the European MIFED Film Market and then opened in 1,288 theaters in the United States on August 17, 1990. Unlike its predecessors, it was distributed by 20th Century Fox instead of Warner Bros. (though some distribution rights would later revert to WB). The film was released only a month before the ExorcistparodyRepossessed, starring Linda Blair and Leslie Nielsen. Blair claimed that Exorcist III was rush-released ahead of Repossessed, hijacking the latter's publicity and forcing the comedy to be released a month later than was originally intended.[10]
Critical response[edit]
The Exorcist III initially received mixed reviews from critics. Review aggregate website Rotten Tomatoes has reported that 56% of critics gave the film positive write-ups based on 39 reviews, with a rating of 5.3/10, with the consensus; 'The Exorcist III is a talky, literary sequel with some scary moments that rival anything from the original.'[13] British film critic Mark Kermode called it 'a restrained, haunting chiller which stimulates the adrenalin and intellect alike,'[14] and New York Times reviewer Vincent Canby said 'The Exorcist III is a better and funnier (intentionally) movie than either of its predecessors'.[15] Critic Brian McKay of efilmcritic.com has remarked that the movie is 'not quite as chilling as the first story' yet 'is at least a quality sequel', being worth watching but suffering from many 'uneven' aspects.[9]People writer Ralph Novak began his review with, 'As a movie writer-director, William Peter Blatty is like David Lynch's good twin: he is eccentric, original, funny and daring, but he also has a sense of taste, pace, and restraint -- which is by way of saying that this is one of the shrewdest, wittiest, most intense and most satisfying horror movies ever made.'
However, Owen Gleiberman of Entertainment Weekly gave a negative review. He wrote, 'If Part II sequels are generally disappointing, Part IIIs are often much, much worse. It can seem as if nothing is going on in them except dim murmurings about the original movie — murmurings that mostly remind you of what isn't being delivered'. He additionally labeled The Exorcist III 'an ash-gray disaster [that] has the feel of a nightmare catechism lesson, or a horror movie made by a depressed monk.'[16] In the British magazine Empire, film critic Kim Newman claimed that 'The major fault in Exorcist III is the house-of-cards plot that is constantly collapsing.'[17] Kevin Thomas of the Los Angeles Times called The Exorcist III 'a handsome, classy art film' that 'doesn't completely work but offers much more than countless, less ambitious films.'[18]
Box office[edit]
The Exorcist III opened in first place in its opening weekend, earning $9,312,219 in the United States. It grossed a total of $26,098,824 in North America and $39,024,251 worldwide.[19] Blatty attributed its poor box office performance to the title imposed by Morgan Creek, having always intended for the film to retain the title of the novel. During development and production, the film went under various titles, including The Exorcist: 1990. Morgan Creek and Fox insisted on including the word Exorcist in the title, which producer Carter DeHaven and Blatty protested against:
I begged them when they were considering titles not to name it Exorcist anything -- because Exorcist II was a disaster beyond imagination. You can't call it Exorcist III, because people will shun the box office. But they went and named it Exorcist III. Then they called me after the third week when we were beginning to fade at the box office and they said 'We'll tell you the reason: it's gonna hurt; you're not gonna like this – the reason is Exorcist II.' I couldn't believe it! They had total amnesia about my warnings![10]
Awards and nominations[edit]
In 1991, the film won a Saturn Award from the Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films, USA, for Best Writing (William Peter Blatty) and was nominated for Best Supporting Actor (Brad Dourif) and Best Horror Film. George C. Scott was also nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actor but lost to Andrew Dice Clay for The Adventures of Ford Fairlane.[20]
Director's cut[edit]
Despite his misgivings about the studio-imposed reshoots, Blatty remarked on his pride in the finished version of Exorcist III: 'It's still a superior film. And in my opinion, and excuse me if I utter heresy here, but for me..it's a more frightening film than The Exorcist.'[10] Blatty hoped to recover the deleted footage from the Morgan Creek vaults so that he might re-assemble the original cut of the film which he said was 'rather different' from what was released, and a version of the film which fans of the Exorcist series have been clamouring for. In 2007, Blatty's wife reported on a fan site that 'my husband tells me that it is Morgan Creek's claim that they have lost all the footage, including an alternate opening scene in which Kinderman views the body of Karras in the morgue, right after his fall down the steps.' However, film critic Mark Kermode has stated that the search for the missing footage is 'ongoing.'[21]
Some pictures (lobby cards, stills) show a few deleted scenes from Blatty's original cut of the film:
- Alternate opening scene in which Kinderman views the body of Karras in the morgue after his fall down the stairs in the ending of the first movie. When Kinderman leaves the morgue, the heart monitor shows signs of life from the body of Karras.
- Aftermath of death scene of the first murdered priest, where his dead body is shown holding his severed head while sitting.
- Longer version of the scene where Kinderman talks with priest about the murders and when demon face is shown on statue of the saint. Originally, an unseen intruder cuts the statue's head and places a knife in its hand.
- Exhumation of Damien Karras's body in Jesuit cemetery. Later it's discovered that dead body is actually from Brother Fain, Jesuit who was tending Karras's body and who disappeared 15 years ago. Although this scene is deleted, parts of it are used in new ending where Patient X/Karras is buried.
- Blatty's original cut also didn't have Jason Miller as Karras/Patient X in it, and it had a different isolation cell for scenes in which Kinderman talked with Patient X/Gemini killer. Some promotional photos show Patient X and Kinderman talking in original cell.
- New exorcism ending that Blatty had to film also had small part deleted in which Karras/Patient X is morphing through many other faces. One theatrical trailer shows this deleted scene.[22]
In March 2011, a fan edit called 'Legion' appeared on the internet, credited to a fan using the pseudonym Spicediver, which removed all exorcism elements and recreated the main story arc of the director's cut without the use of any lost footage. In 2012, cast member Dourif agreed to present a screening of the fan edit at the Mad Monster Party horror convention held in Charlotte, North Carolina, on March 25. Dourif introduced the film and did a Q&A session with the audience afterwards.[23]Anaconda full movies on youtube.
In December 2015, Morgan Creek began hinting via its Twitter feed that the Director's Cut was discovered and would eventually be released. Blatty later wrote on his website: '[Morgan Creek] are planning a new Blu Ray of 'my cut.'[24]
On October 25, 2016, Scream Factory released a 2-disc Collector's Edition of the film, including the supposedly lost footage.[25] The website states: 'We know that the biggest question you might have is: Will there be a 'Director's Cut' of the film? The answer is yes—but with some caveats. We are working on putting together a version that will be close to Blatty's original script using a mixture of various film and video tape sources that we have been provided with.
In speaking to the process of creating the Legion Director's cut, Blu-ray producer Cliff MacMillan explains further as to the journey to get there and the outcome. 'We conducted an exhaustive search through a pallet of film assets from the original shoot to re-create William Peter Blatty's intended vision. Unfortunately, that footage has been lost to time. To that end, we turned to VHS tapes of the film's dailies to assemble the director's cut. However, even some of that footage was incomplete, so scenes from the theatrical re-shoot were used to fill in the gaps. This director's cut is a composite of varying footage quality from the best available sources.'
References[edit]
- ^'THE EXORCIST III (18)'. British Board of Film Classification. October 10, 1990. Retrieved January 7, 2016.
- ^'The Exorcist III Info, Trailers, and Reviews at MovieTome'. Movietome.com. Archived from the original on September 28, 2009. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
- ^'Zodiac Killer : The Letters - 01-29-1974'. SFGate (San Francisco Chronicle). December 2, 2008. Retrieved April 7, 2013.
- ^Park Dietz (1992). At the movies with Jeffrey Dahmer. Retrieved April 28, 2017.
- ^Lausner, Jim (October 26, 2006). 'Prosecutor: 'Exorcist' Gave Rolling Ideas To Fool Psychologist'. The Orlando Sentinel. Orlando, Florida: Tronc. Retrieved October 17, 2017.
It also came out that Rolling saw the movie Exorcist III in Gainesville possibly hours before the violent spree started and may have gotten ideas for his murderous rampage from the horror flick.
- ^ abFangoria #122 (May 1993)
- ^Theninthconfiguration.com
- ^Barkan, Jonathan (July 6, 2016). ''The Exorcist III' Getting 2-Disc Collector's Edition'. Bloodydisgusting.com. Retrieved April 30, 2018.
- ^ abNieporent, Ben. 'Movie Review - Exorcist III, The - eFilmCritic'. efilmcritic.com. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^ abcdefghijklThe Exorcist: Out of the Shadows (Omnibus Press, 1999)
- ^http://legion.theninthconfiguration.com/
- ^Blatty, William Peter (1998). Classic Screenplays: The Exorcist & Legion. London, England: Faber & Faber.
- ^The Exorcist III at Rotten Tomatoes.
- ^'The Exorcist III'. Timeout London. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^Canby, Vincent (August 18, 1990). 'Movie Review - Leaving the Devil Out in the Cold'. New York Times. New York City: New York Times Company. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^Gleiberman, Owen (August 31, 1990). 'The Exorcist III'. Entertainment Weekly. New York City: Meredith Corporation. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^Newman, Kim (January 1, 2000). 'The Exorcist III review'. Empire. London, England: Bauer Media Group. Retrieved April 30, 2018.
- ^Thomas, Kevin (August 20, 1990). 'MOVIE REVIEWS : 'Exorcist III' Will Turn a Few Heads'. Los Angeles Times. Tronc. Retrieved April 30, 2018.
- ^'The Exorcist III (1990)'. Box Office Mojo. Retrieved April 30, 2018.
- ^Awards for The Exorcist III on IMDb
- ^Kermode, Mark. 'Mark Kermode's film blog: More Points of You: Part Two'. BBC. London, England. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe34ekPWi0o, retrieved October 24, 2015Missing or empty
title=(help) - ^[1]
- ^Galluzzo, Rob (December 17, 2015). 'Are We Finally Getting A 'Director's Cut' of THE EXORCIST III: LEGION?'. Blumhouse.com. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
- ^''The Exorcist III' Getting 2-Disc Collector's Edition - Bloody Disgusting!'. July 6, 2016. Retrieved September 10, 2016.
External links[edit]
- The Exorcist III on IMDb
- The Exorcist III at Rotten Tomatoes
Permalink
But if you're looking for a true psychological thriller (psychological = appealing to the intellect, not the viscera), this will be one hell of a treat for you. The dialogue is fantastic. The acting is superb (Brad Dourif & George C. Scott on the same screen. What could be better?). The philosophy is provocative. And the mood is as thick as it gets. Much of the movie is composed of a series of dialogues between two people in a dark room. If you liked the second half of APOCALYPSE NOW, you will enjoy this immensely.
I rank this movie as one of my all time English language faves with the likes of AMADEUS, 2001, Alfred Hitchcock's ROPE, PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY, and CITIZEN KANE. I'm serious; it's that good. Unfortunately, it was marketed to the wrong audience, and that's why it received such low ratings. Let me repeat: this is not a spooky movie. It's actually a very intellectual story with a lot of big words, literary overtones and powerful acting, and it's one of the few movies which I consider superior to the book (but of course writer Blatty directed this, so I'd expect no less).
Now don't get me wrong; it's anything but dull. There is one scene in particular that will scare the living crap out of you! It's a long scene done with one still camera, no music, no sound, hardly any action.. but egads it's probably the most suspenseful/frightening thing I've ever seen in any movie.
In the style of the classic thrillers, so much is left to the imagination of the viewer--and oh there is PLENTY of disturbing, shocking stuff to imagine. In one conversation you'll hear about a murder so vile that you'll never want to hear the word 'catheter' again. And the beauty is that you never see a thing. If this subtle style appeals to you, then you certainly won't be disappointed.
10/10. And I don't give 10s very often.
Permalink
The film follows the friendship between Father Dyer and Detective Kinderman. Meanwhile a serial killer is running around Georgetown gruesomely murdering the city's residents. Kinderman is called into duty and is puzzled by the brutal slayings. That is until he follows the clues and they lead him to a very unlikely place. Kinderman's faith in man is tested as he continues on through out this bizarre and seemingly never ending case.
George C. Scott is excellent as Kinderman. he plays the role of the detective as if he was tailored made for the part. Ed Flanders co-stars as Father Dyer. Nicol Williamson has a guest star spot as a Father Merrin type priest (his scenes seemed to have been added during post production because they don't fit in with the rest of the movie). The ending felt rushed and it has 'post production' stamped on it. Word has it that the film was indeed tampered with during the post production. I think so to because the book's ending was far different than what was put out on the silver screen.
Is the movie worth watching? Yes it is because it's a worthy follow up to the Exorcist. Even though it was fiddled around with during the final phase of production, scenes seem to have been added and the ever presence of the producers looking over the director's shoulder, it's still a great film. I'm probably one of the few people who are actually satisfied with the movie. I wished Blatty could have the original version of this film restored. I enjoyed the book and the movie as well.
Highly recommended!
A majority of people hate intellectual horror films. What's wrong with having to think once in a while?
Permalink
One of the reasons why I love this film is because it is essentially a mystery film (which I'm not usually to keen on) but it also has the major horror elements that make a horror film. The hallway scene at the hospital is one of the best horror scenes I have seen. Just the tension and the fact you don't know whats going on and the silence, then suddenly.. well I wont give anything away. Its definitely different to the original so if your looking for another The Exorcist then look elsewhere, but this will probably still scare the daylights out of you.
Overall, fantastic film and I'm glad that Father Karras is in this film because I loved his character in the original. 9/10
Permalink
But as I was saying, it's underrated. A golden raspberry for worst actor? Comical. George C Scott's performance here might not be as memorable as that in Patton, but it's still an excellent performance.
And Brad Dourif, sharing duties with Jason Miller as the sinister 'Patient X' is a much more effective demon here than in the 'Child's Play' series.
The only complaint I'd have on the actors front, is that the brilliant Nicol Williamson is underused as Father Morning, but the character was added in at the last minute by producers.
There are plenty of comic moments, too, notably a scene in the open psychiatric ward involving a man in a wheelchair flashing at the charge nurse. (Trust me, you have to see it, really).
Sadly, it's probably due to the risible 'Exorcist II' that this film was so overlooked, and instantly assumed to be awful. But then again, whether people like movies or not is down to taste, I suppose.
Try it. You might like it.
Permalink
Permalink
First up I'll talk about the acting. The cast did a bloody good job in their roles. Scott gives a tour de force performance where he mixes grandfatherly likability with someone who is clearly struggling with demons of his own. It is clear why this man is one of the best character actors of the silver screen. The few scenes that he shared with Father Dyer were played so well you really thought they had been lifelong friends. The other acting coup was getting Brad Dourif to play the Gemini killer. He proves here that he will always be more than the voice of our favorite pint-sized plastic doll from hell. His character spends the film being shackled in a cell but yet is able to convey a sense of menace few can provide with the help of other actors, props and settings. Jason Miller returns also as the 'body' of Father Karras and swaps back and forth the role with Dourif. The Kinderman / Karras / Gemini scenes are the highlight of the film. The actors go full bore at each other and turn what could have become boring exposition scenes into film highlights.
William Peter Blatty stepped up to the plate and directs this time around. He took a book he wrote, Legion and tweaked it into the screenplay for part 3. I believe, but am not positive, that the exorcism at the end of the film in not in the book. Unfortunately I haven't read it since just before the movie came out and can't remember. The direction here is done very well for his second film. He sets up a chilly atmosphere when needed the most and steps aside to let the actors do their thing. Fairly straight-forward he lets the story role without flashy visuals getting in the way, signs of a true writer. The story is character driven with a few creepy moments but I had wished the atmosphere had been a little denser with scares at the end though. This effort comes closest to the original.
The music score is a bit light with many of the better scenes given over strictly to audio effects. A little bit disappointing but doesn't affect things too badly.
In the end you have a good sequel with a character driven script and a bunch of top notch actors ripping it up. Unfortunately I thought the ending was a bit rushed with the inclusion of the exorcism is just a little out of place. What for most of the film seems like a classic example of the walk-in of an 'old soul' suddenly becomes a possession story. But you got to give the distributors what they want I guess.
Permalink
Permalink
I heard the senseless exorcism climax (featuring Nicol Williamson) was added to the film later against Blatty's wishes so audiences wouldn't be 'confused,' which basically means the studio who financed it take the general viewing public as idiots.
Make sure to also check out Blatty's great THE NINTH CONFIGURATION (AKA TWINKLE, TWINKLE, KILLER KANE), also a pretty underrated movie. I noticed he hasn't returned to scripting/directing film since this was made, probably because it wasn't well received at the time, but it's nice to read other comments and see I'm not the only one who really enjoyed this film.
Score: 8 out of 10
Permalink
Permalink
Although I actually enjoyed the second 'Exorcist' film, most people consider it a stinker and like to pretend it never happened. For those people, this is the right film to watch. A great tale of possession, that follows rather directly (though belatedly) from the original.
George C. Scott adds a certain weight to any film. Just as he did for 'The Changeling', he makes what could be a forgettable horror film into something really worthwhile. He is a vastly underrated actor.
Permalink
Permalink
It's exceptional filmaking when you can turn what must have been a simple scene on the screenplay's page into a frightening experience. An overall sense of dread permeates this film and here's a warning: many jaded, shallow genX-er's won't be able to fathom it. They are too ignorant of the religious implications and de-sensitized to violence. They would perhaps prefer something along the lines of Peter Jackson's 'Dead Alive'.(another, albeit different, horror masterpiece.)
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
The morning after I watched this movie, I did not go on my walk. Instead, I was curled up on the couch, watching crappy family sitcoms, just trying to get the chill off my spine.
When I first purchased this movie, I, like so many others, thought I was buying the original The Exorcist. I had never seen it before, so I did not know what the cover should look like, and I missed the little 'III' in the 'O.' So when I got home, I discovered my blunder. I had never even heard of this movie. I had never even heard of the Exorcist II! Naturally, I was expecting it to suck. You know.. 'If I've never even heard of it, it can't be very big, and if it was good, it'd be big.' And then I watched it. There was not a single moment where I was not enveloped in suspense. The nurse's station scene is a MASTERPIECE. Period. Not only did it scare me more than any other scene in any other movie I have ever watched, but it was just so finely crafted. The camera never moves. It's like it's just edging you on, warning you that something huge is going to happen. And, if you're anything like me, your eyes start playing tricks on you. Because it was so still, I kept looking for things that were moving, and I kept thinking the door was opening slightly, or that something was twitching. Every time she left the screen, I held my breath, and every time she returned, I sighed in relief. Then, when she returned for her last time.. well, I swear I would have screamed if I wasn't petrified into stillness.
And the astonishing thing is, they manage to pull all of this off with very little gore! This is not a slasher horror. It is a psychological thriller. If you watch it and are not terrified, in my estimation, you are simply not attentive enough to get it.
I have not seen the original so I cannot compare the two, but I can say that this movie scared me more than any other movie I have ever watched. Period.
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
Permalink
'The Exorcist' was a much more mature and sophisticated exploration of the mysteries of faith and the role of religion/faith in a rapidly progressive society. 'The Exorcist III' in a comparative sense lacks the thematic depth of the first film. The theme is to show how the spirit of evil can overwhelm the body and spirit of our heroes and institutions, but in the end, with the help of selfless sacrifice and undying faith, the good in this world will always overcome evil.
But what can be perceived to be a comparative lack of depth in William Peter Blatty's script, gets to a great extent made up for by Blatty's inspired direction. He masterfully executes horror set- pieces some of which genuinely gave me the heebie-jeebies. Friedkin's influence on the visual style is very apparent(Blatty even uses the 'Psycho' overhead falling shot that Friedkin used in the first film with the doctor). However in spite of Friedkin's influence, I think the surrealistic bravura of Blatty's visual storytelling has an impressive forceful uniqueness to it. I have to admire the cinematography and the sound-mixing which complement each other in the process of creating the uncomfortably creepy vibe of the film.
George C. Scott adds the world-weary gravitas to the character of Kinderman. He is headstrong, determined and dogged in his profession, but one can notice a certain sense of hopelessness that his character has picked up with age and experience which makes the mental state of Kinderman somewhat similar to the mental state of Sheriff Bell's(Tommy Lee Jones) character in 'No Country for Old Men'. Brad Bourif and Jason Miller also deserve special mention.
The screenplay of 'The Exorcist III' gives more priority to perfunctory elements in tune with the genre of horror over thematic depth which makes it a horror film with some dramatic elements unlike 'The Exorcist' which was a hardcore drama with horror elements. However Blatty's uninhibitedly heightened style of direction and his ability to successfully ratchet up the volatility of a particular scene can be really fun. It's not a 'great' film, but it still is well made and deserves to be seen.
Permalink
George C. Scott plays police lieutenant Kinderman (a character seen briefly in the first film), hardened but human, who is on the trail of a mysterious, sadistic and methodical killer who takes after the famed Gemini Killer (a take on the real-life Zodiac Killer), despite the fact that he has been dead for fifteen years. When a longtime friend in Father Dyer (Ed Flanders) emerges as the next victim, a chain of events unfolds that brings back a familiar face from the past in Father Karras (Jason Miller reprising his role from the first film). Bit by bit, what Kinderman unearths turns out to be bigger than himself and threatens his very existence.
Scott is reliable and likable as always in the role of Kinderman, and while Jason Miller isn't given much to do here, it's a pleasure to see him again. Brad Dourif, best known as Chucky in the 'Child's Play' series, is the wild-card of the film and nearly threatens to steal the show in one of his most intense performances. The script, based off the Blatty's novel, 'Legion,' is hardly a re-hash of the first film, and compared to other sequels from its era, is quite a refreshing change of pace as an intelligent and classy picture in its own right. The gore and special effects are kept to a minimum, as the movie is just as much about its characters and dialogue as it is about its horrors.
The film's not without its faults, of course. Take the tacked-on ending that reeks of studio interference, for example. Blatty's battles with producer James G. Robinson (who had nothing to do with the original film in the first place) result in an intelligent horror movie/sequel that simply doesn't know how to end itself. It's as if someone was standing there saying: 'This is fine and all, but we need an exorcism scene!' and voila! While it results in a rather gruesome and exciting special effects opportunity, the man-sticking-to-the-ceiling bit feels out of place with the tone of the rest of the film, which for the most part, keeps things cerebral and tasteful. This little bit felt like something you'd see in a 'Hellraiser' flick, not that there's anything wrong with that. As for Patrick Ewing playing the Angel of Death in a dream sequence? Don't even get me started. Heck, even an appearance by Fabio seems bound and determined to rain on a decent parade.
In the end, 'The Exorcist III' is a solid sequel that falls short of greatness. Its creativity and inventiveness is undermined by the insistence on re-introducing elements from the original film for nothing other than keeping with the namesake. Fans who felt themselves left in the cold by 'The Exorcist II' will find this a treat, as will anyone else who loves an intelligent horror/thriller. Despite its flaws and the fact that it effectively killed off the franchise (was it ever meant to be?) 'The Exorcist III' is as close to greatness as any of the sequels or prequels gets to the original.
Permalink
SPOILERS BELOW(Please don't read until you see the film..its worth it)
The scene in the hospital where the killer, in a white sheet, goes after the nurse with a pair of shears has got to be one of my favorite unnerving scenes ever. It takes so long to happen BUT when it does, WOW!!!!!!!!!!!
Permalink