It should be considered astounding that The Exorcist (1973) continues to be as revered as any film of its era. For the franchise that it’s spawned has done little to capitalize on such a towering legacy. The Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977) is one of the worst/silliest sequels ever made, a movie so bad that everyone involved in a major creative role on the film should have been slapped. The Exorcist III (1990) has developed something of a cult following in recent years, but we’ve perhaps over-corrected on the praise. It’s a messy, rambling, forgettable film sans that one good jump scare and that one good Brad Dourif monologue. In 2004, the franchise resorted to the 2000s prequel trend, “blessing” us with Exorcist: The Beginning. I’d love to find out if that movie is any good, but first, I’d have to find someone who’s actually seen it.
Ditto for the short-lived TV series, although it’s does possess the most positive reception of any entry since the original film, even as no one remembers it. So it’s been a rough go! I guess this is the price you pay when daring to traverse these blasphemous waters. Enter David Gordon Green, who’s already experienced his own baptism by fire by way of the mixed reaction to his financially successful Halloween sequel trilogy. He’s back behind the camera to drag another legendary 1970s property back to the big screen, in the umpteenth legacyquel of the modern era.
The new film pivots away from the crippling Catholic guilt that sets the tone in the original but keeps the survivor’s guilt in tow. A young girl named Angela (Lidya Jewett) is one of our new protagonists, adorned with love from her father, Victor (Leslie Odom Jr.), who feels pressure to provide the care of two parents. Their interactions are cheesy but earnest, calling back to the idea that The Exorcist is partially a movie about parenthood. Yet, the family’s new and uncomfortable surroundings, in addition to the lack of a community or supportive system, lead to Victor’s uneasiness about his daughter’s well-being. That angst is expectedly capitalized on when Angela and her bestie begin playing around with the spirit world, unknowingly unleashing a ruthless demonic force.
Believer is simultaneously a flawed film as well as perhaps the best Exorcist movie since III, if not the original itself – but we are talking the lowest of bars. It’s a movie that looks to inspire hope in the bleakest of circumstances. But there’s also an acknowledgment of the cruelty of life, with the characters often finding they can only have what they want after they’ve sacrificed something of great value. It’s a movie that makes its characters go through the wringer for just a sliver of peace or happiness.
Aesthetically, it is a gruesome, often ugly film with muddy cinematography and claustrophobic blocking. No one is going to hang any of these shots in the Louvre. The film’s repurposed use of religion, in comparison to the original, is also worth noting. The Exorcist became a pop culture phenomenon partially due to the timing of the release, capitalizing on a rising religious panic. In turn, the original film seems audacious in its willingness to touch on or even offend the sensibilities of Catholocism and church secrets that were often only whispered about. This is what makes Pazuzu such a memorable and confrontational villain – he spits in the face of the sacrality of Christianity and does so through the avatar of a pre-teen girl.
Believer exists in a much different religious climate, choosing to give Victor reason to distrust organized practice. Unlike Chris (Ellen Burstyn), in the original film, it isn’t simply atheism but full on resentment. The movie also broadens the type of faith the story chooses to focus on, including a bit of Voodoo into the spiritual angst. In turn, Victor becomes disillusioned with religion, which makes him something of a recluse in his conservative community. However, there are instances where you wish the script went a little deeper with these thematic elements. The screenplay just doesn’t sparkle with the same kind of verbose debate you’d see in the original Exorcist or similarly great possession movies. It’s a very simplistic depiction of a crisis of faith.
However, as blandly rendered some of the elements may be, Green’s storytelling choices are at least sound and logical. Compared to Halloween Ends, whose convoluted storytelling and side quests strained suspension of disbelief, Believer sacrifices riskier swings for more safe and efficient storytelling. This is ultimately a family drama, just like the original, and one that concerns itself with the survivor’s remorse two people must share after a family tragedy. Thematically, that means the movie can touch upon the complicated thoughts and emotions one may go through that don’t look particularly virtuous and empathetic in hindsight. The very type of regretful moments that a demon may seek to capitalize on.
Cudos to Jewett and Olivia O’Neill for strong performances. It’s a well-known playbook, but they both hit the dichotomy between sweetness and callous cruelty this role requires. It’s also unique that Angela is depicted as older than Katherine (O’Neal), showcasing that weird dynamic where students in the same grade can be at different levels of maturity. But the perceived difference in age doesn’t spare either from the gruesome depiction needed to bring their demonic performance to life. I just hope both young girls had a more pleasant experience here than Linda Blair, who went through hell on the set of the 1973 Exorcist.
If there’s one thing that The Exorcist: Believer can confirm is that this persistent franchise still can’t come close to matching the terror that started it all. So the movie is left competing for “the best of the rest.” But given my genuine lack of high expectations going in, Believer ended up being more enjoyable than anticipated. The narrative the movie constructs is simplistic but well executed. Even if many of the side characters don’t land, the main protagonists are compelling enough as poor souls caught in a spell of family torment. Even the film’s obligation to legacyquel checklists still fit into the thematic web of the anxiety that comes with entrusting a higher power to protect your children. Some viewers, especially long-term fans, may object to a certain controversial callback in this movie – but I’d argue it’s the one time that the film is willing to be daring and daring to offend. The moment is audacious and nasty; the type of mean streak these type of movies were capable of more often – before they became IP.
