Am I the only one out there who's a fan of "Exorcist II: The Heretic?"

Is there anyone out there who's a fan of "Exorcist II: The Heretic"? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "The Heretic" is probably my favorite horror film of all time! I know that the original "The Exorcist" is the acknowledged all-time classic, but I actually like this first sequel a little bit more. It stars Linda Blair as the now-teenaged Regan McNeil and Richard Burton as Father Philip Lamont, a friend and disciple of Max von Sydow's Father Lankester Merrin. It was released in the summer of 1977 (at around the same time as "Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope," in fact!), and was directed by John Boorman, the man responsible for "Point Blank," "Deliverance," "Excalibur," "The Emerald Forest," "Hope and Glory," and "The General," among others.
I think "Exorcist II: The Heretic" is a terribly underrated film, and when it came out it was disastrously received by critics and audiences alike. Audiences coming to see it were probably primed and pumped up for something that would be even more horrific and grotesque than William Friedkin's 1973 original, and they felt thwarted and cheated when it didn't really live up to their expectations.
Any other "Heretic" fans out there? If so, speak up and don't be afraid! (You were wondering about my user name, perhaps? Hint, hint!)

 

(sound of crickets)

 

..to be honest, i've never actually seen it...

It took me years to actually sit down and watch the original "Exorcist" simply because i was worried it wouldn't live up to my expectations (which, the first time i viewed it, it didn't. Subsequent viewings with more reasonable expectations have allowed me to enjoy it).

I've heard so many negative things about "Heretic" that, at some point, i WOULD like to see it, but it's not one of those movies that i'd ever actually go out LOOKING for.. I'd have to find it late at night on cable, or see it on a rack at my friend's house and ask "mind if i borrow this?"

I also haven't seen "Exorcist III" which i really should because i'm a big George C. Scott fan.

I did watch "Exorcist: The Beginning" though. Not exactly the best thing to ever get made.

 

I think you summed up the reasons why this isn't a popular film nicely in your first post.

I thought Richard Burton slept through this part and it was too much of a departure from the original, not scary at all and badly acted.

The second sequel was a better film, with the return of Father Carras(sp), though it was nothing on the original. I haven't even bothered to see the prequels.

 

FINALLY, some responses!

Drew Atreides,
I've seen "Exorcist: The Beginning" as well, and I wasn't particularly impressed by it either! Although I would be interested in seeing Paul Schrader's "Dominion," which is the original prequel.

I understand why "The Heretic" was a failure with audiences. In terms of acting and storytelling, the original "Exorcist" is far superior, I'll be the first to admit. But I just find "The Heretic" so much more fascinating in terms of its...well, for lack of a better descriptive, its metaphysical trippiness, and just on a purely visual level. Yeah, it's a weird, misshapen oddity of a film, and I understand totally why most people don't connect with it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve another look or an attempt at re-evaluation of the virtues it does possess. Warts and all, it's still my favorite horror film of all time! I suppose "smudged masterpiece" would be a fair assessment of "The Heretic."
BTW, I have a really fascinating book called "The Making of Exorcist II: The Heretic" by Barbara Pallenberg. (She was the wife of creative consultant Rospo Pallenberg. Rospo also collaborated with director John Boorman on the screenplays for "Excalibur" and "The Emerald Forest.") This "Making Of" book goes into rather withering detail about the many trials, tribulations, and real-life horrors that went into the making of "The Heretic." After reading this book, I think that it's no small miracle that the film has any kind of flow or cohesion to it at all! Not surprisingly, the book is out of print. (I got it at a used bookstore.) Also out of print, unfortunately, is "John Boorman," a book about the director and his films written by French critic Michel Ciment (who also did a really good book about Stanley Kubrick). It's from 1986, so it's pretty dated, but it contains very detailed analyses of all Boorman's work up to and including "The Emerald Forest"! More recently, Boorman published an autobiographical memoir entitled "Adventures of a Suburban Boy," which is also a fascinating read and contains some wonderful and amusing anecdotes from his many years in "the biz"!

As far as William Peter Blatty's "Exorcist III" is concerned, I thought it was good, but it could have been so much better if Blatty had been allowed to make a more faithful adaptation of his 1983 novel "Legion," on which it's based. The studio insisted that Blatty film an exorcism scene for the climax, so he cast Nicol Williamson (Merlin, of course, from Boorman's "Excalibur"--small world!) in the role of Father Morning and had his character perform an exorcism on Damien Karras (Jason Miller) in his cell in the Disturbed Ward of Georgetown Hospital where much of the film is set. It doesn't completely wreck the movie, but it does feel tonally out of sync with everything that came before. If Blatty had been allowed to make "Legion" instead of "The Exorcist III," he probably would have made a cinematic masterpiece equal to his own "The Ninth Configuration" from 1979.

 

Although I would be interested in seeing Paul Schrader's "Dominion," which is the original prequel.

I would also like to see this one too, it is supposed to be extremely better than "Exorcist: The Beginning". It is more of a physcological thriller. He filmed the whole movie, but the studio didn't like it, so they fired him then hired a new director and reshot the whole movie.

 

Hah, the fact that you are a fan of "heretic" is well shown by your nickname all this time. I'm actually a great fan of "Heretic".

I watched "Exorcist" 4 years ago at the age of 17. At that time I was horrified. I just couldn't see the reason why the little girl would get possesed by the demon. It was the only thriller/horror movie up to that point that made me think why and how that happened. When I saw Heretic it all came clear as crystal water. Burton was perfect, The doctor was perfect, James Earl Jones was perfect and Linda was perfect also. The reason for the possesion in the first movie is shown in the sequel "heretic" and that's all there is to it. People should be advised to see "heretic" if only to rest their doubts about the first movie.

 

Exorcist is a classic,the thought of any sequel is a bad idea,especially one with returning characters(Regan)The idea for Exorcist:The Beginning was intriguing,too bad Harlin screwed up so bad,I`m waiting for the Schrader version to hit DVD.

 

So, at least 103728103 figured it out!
Actually, Pazuzu is actually named as the demon in the Iraq-set prologue of William Peter Blatty's original novel "The Exorcist." However, we don't actually hear the name spoken aloud until "The Heretic"!
By the way, has anyone ever noticed, in the "Star Wars" movies, how similar the eyes of Darth Sidious and Darth Maul are to those of possession victims in the "Exorcist" movies (Linda Blair in the first one, Jason Miller in "III")? Well...there you have it: Darth Pazuzu!

So, anyhoo...any other "Heretic" fans out there???

 

I am a big fan of the original Exorcist movie. The sequel was okay but didn't deliver to me the same fright that the original did. Did you see the Directors cut of the first one. When Reagan was catwalking down the stairs, that would have been a frightning scene to watch in the movie theatre.

I understand that the reason Reagan was possessed in the first place as beause she was a healer of some sort and the devil wants to corrupt those possible of healing the sick. The last scene of the Heretic was a failure. I thought it to be too corny with Reagan swinging around whatever she had in her hand. What was it a necklace?

As far as the third one, I enjoyed it more than the first sequel. There were some out of your seat moments. I like the fact that he used the old people to get out of the asylum. Seeing Father Karras again was a treat. In my opinion that would have been a better 1st sequal than Heretic.

Jag29

 

jag29,
I actually did see the extended cut in October of 2000, when it came to a local theatre. Oh boy! It is quite different an experience than when you're watching it on the small screen, and I do agree that the "spider-walk" was a real jolt!
I actually have both the original cut of "The Exorcist" and the extended cut on DVD.

BUT...this is all about "The Heretic," so don't let me get us off topic!

 

I thought your name was a futurama reference...

Like Comics? Like Games? Like the Jedi Draft? If you answer yes to any of these questions there may be an opportunity for you in the near future! PM me today for details!