Following the international sensation provoked by director William Friedkin's 1973 classic The Exorcist - which, to the best of my knowledge, remains the most financially successful horror film ever – there was understandably much excitement when Warner Bros announced its plans for a sequel. However, plans for a sequel hit an early stumbling block when both William Friedkin and William Peter Blatty (writer of the original novel on which The Exorcist was based, and writer/co-producer of the original film) made it clear they wished to have no part in the project. Wishing to have such a major project in a seemingly safe pair of hands Warner's entrusted the task of directing and co-writing to English filmmaker John Boorman whose most famous credit to that time had been his wildly successful survivalist thriller Deliverance (1972) starring Burt Reynolds and Ned Beatty.
It soon became apparent too that Warner's were sparing no expense having spent an estimated $14,000,000 on the film, making it the most expensive film the studio had ever produced up to that point. However, behind closed doors Exorcist II: The Heretic was proving a troubled and turbulent production due to a mixture of rewrites to the script, tensions between the cast, illness and the alleged dissatisfaction of Boorman who is said to have threatened to walk out on the film during production and was only dissuaded from doing so by the counter threat of legal action. Most of this centred around Boorman's dislike of William Goodhart's script and this eventually led to Boorman and "creative associate" Rospo Pallenberg performing several hasty re-writes during production without Goodhart's involvement. However, despite its production troubles the sense of public and critical anticipation for Exorcist II: The Heretic was increasing tenfold, thanks primarily to the debut of its superbly edited trailer which hinted tantalisingly at a film even more frightening than its predecessor.
When Exorcist II: The Heretic was finally unveiled however, few could quite believe the bizarre, deliberately difficult, and frequently incomprehensible yet - in horror terms - relatively tame motion picture that Boorman and company had produced. After the audience (which included none other than William Peter Blatty) that attended the films premiere in New York City laughed Boorman's original preferred 118 minute cut off the screen Warner executives promptly flew into a panic and approached Boorman to re-edit the film to make the narrative "easier to follow". However, the resultant, re-cut 110 minute theatrical cut faired no better and upon its eventual theatrical release both critics and audiences alike united in panning the film. In one notorious incident the audience present at the Hollywood Boulevard premiere of Exorcist II: The Heretic voiced their disdain for the film by pelting the screen with rubbish. An unmitigated commercial and critical disaster having been slated by seemingly everyone, Exorcist II: The Heretic grossed modestyly profitable yet very disappointing $30,000,000 in the United States (The Exorcist took an initial American gross of around $165,000,000) and swiftly came to be regarded as one of the worst sequels ever made, a reputation that had stuck to the film ever since.
The plot of Exorcist II: The Heretic takes place around four years after the infamous events of The Exorcist. The now teenage Regan MacNeil still suffers from persistent nightmares and bouts of sleepwalking due to her spell under the alleged possession of a demonic entity. As a result the otherwise friendly, outgoing and well adjusted girl is undergoing treatment at the hands of Dr Gene Tuskin, a psychologist who specialises in the treatment of disturbed children.
Meanwhile Father Philip Lamont is appointed by the Catholic Church to make a low profile, "unsanctioned" investigation into the circumstances behind the death of the late Father Merrin who died mysteriously whilst allegedly attempting to exorcise the demon inhabiting the body of young Regan MacNeil on that fateful night in Georgetown just a few years before. Using Dr Tuskin's pioneering method of synchronised hypnosis Father Lamont is able to travel psychologically together with Regan into her recollections of the night Father Merrin died. The demon which Regan was possessed by is identified as Pazuzu, an evil spirit of the air originating from Africa where – funnily enough – the late Father Merrin had previously encountered it some years prior to his death whilst performing an exorcism of a stricken young boy.
Father Lamont gradually becomes convinced that the demon Pazuzu is not actually exorcised at all and is still lying dormant within Regan waiting for a time when it can once again take possession of her. Meanwhile Dr Tuskin and Regan's guardian Sharon Spencer become increasingly agitated with Father Lamont, believing that his increasing obsession with Regan is having a detrimental effect on the girl's already fragile mental health. Lamont's seniors in the church are also anxious for him to end his investigation as they believe he is becoming dangerously involved on a personal level. In defiance of the church Father Lamont pays a visit to Africa which confirms his initial suspicions and upon his return Lamont whisks Regan off and returns with her to the site of her initial possession in Georgetown in a last, desperate bid to exorcise Pazuzu from her body and mind once and for all.
Even if viewed now retrospectively in Boorman's original, preferred 118 minute cut it is painfully easy to see just why Exorcist II: The Heretic has met with such universal derision over the years. It is quite frankly a film so abysmally bad in both conception and execution that no amount of post production tinkering and re-editing could ever have redeemed it even slightly. The viewer is left to watch in horrified bemusement as Boorman, writer William Goodhart and "creative associate" Rospo Pallenberg systematically strip away any sense of everything that made the original such a runaway success. Instead they opt to pitch Exorcist II: The Heretic as an overblown, self indulgent and pretentious cinematic essay on the turbulent quest for balance between good and evil that is fought upon the higher, spiritual plane (or something). The result, no matter which version you are unfortunate enough to see it in, is a hideously convoluted and more or less completely incomprehensible headfuck of a motion picture that can barely be described as a horror film at all, let alone be took seriously as a legitimate sequel to The Exorcist. Indeed, anyone expecting anything resembling a horror film of any description is in for a shock as any inverted crucifixes or satanic imagery gets safely tucked away as Boorman and his cohorts drag their bemused and unwilling audience kicking and screaming on an insufferable and seemingly endless journey into nonsensical pretension.
To their eternal credit the cast do actually try hard with the woeful excuse for a script they were given to work with. Linda Blair is especially good and surprisingly subtle in her depiction of a teenaged Regan who has by now matured into a sweet natured yet emotionally and psychologically scarred young woman. Indeed in many respects she is often the saving grace of the film and it is actually a shame that typecasting prevented her career from really going anywhere in subsequent years. Less satisfying is Richard Burton as Father Lamont who initially seems to get his teeth into the role but as the film ebbs on descends into some unbearably hammy overacting. Indeed, by the final act Burton's "performance" has become so hilariously overwrought that he almost manages to eclipse Rod Steiger's awful ham turn in The Amityville Horror (1979) when it comes to the dubious accolade of the worst depiction of a priest by a name actor in a mainstream horror film. It will therefore come as a surprise to no one that Burton’s notorious dalliances with the demon drink – which plagued the latter days of his career – were largely responsible for this. Despite beginning the shoot in a rare state of sobriety Burton soon began hitting the sauce with his usual trademark vigour and as the production rolled on was, by all accounts, frequently drunk during shooting.
Elsewhere the supporting cast treat the script with far more respect than it deserves and Louise Fletcher (who allegedly hated the script and lobbied for rewrites), Ned Beatty and especially returnee Kitty Winn all escape from the ensuing fiasco with their dignity and professional reputations intact so kudos to them! What a shame then that their collectively belligerent efforts are rendered all for nought by the ridiculous excuse for a script that calls on them to spout line after unfathomable line of meaningless, sub religious gobbledygook. At times it feels as if not just Blair but the entire cast are demonically possessed and resultantly speaking in tongues, also sods law automatically dictates that the inebriated Burton is blessed with all of the most cringe-inducing snippets of dialogue, which is a recipe for disaster for obvious reasons.
Technically of course the film is an absolute marvel, especially on a visual level, boasting what were for the time pioneering special effects and superb make-up work courtesy of the maestro Dick Smith. Thanks to a mixture of this technical wizardry and some fine cinematography courtesy of William A. Fraker, Exorcist II: The Heretic does actually manage to throw up the occasional, genuinely startling image. This would seemingly prove enough to win Exorcist II: The Heretic at least one notable admirer in the form of famed film critic Pauline Kael who didn't much care for Friedkin's original film but was positive in her assessment of Boorman’s sequel remarking that it "had more visual magic than a dozen movies". I can only surmise that Kael viewed a silent print of the film or slept through all the dialogue passages because for me the presence of several long and seemingly meaningless special effects only heighten the films already uniform badness. As swarms of locusts flood the screen for no good reason and James Earl Jones parades foolishly in silly costumes to the accompaniment of ceaseless tribal drums and a typically fine but in this case totally misappropriated Ennio Morricone score, the sublime but bizarre imagery only serve to increase the already overwhelming sense of confusion and narrative incoherence to a level that flies straight off the scale. In fairness Boorman and company do muster up a little excitement in the shape of a fairly well done, special effects laden finale in which Regan and Father Lamont return to Georgetown for a final confrontation with Pazuzu, but by then it's frankly too little too late.
In contrast to the likes of Deer Hunter director Michael Cimino whose career and professional credibility was unceremoniously squelched by the unmitigated failure of his infamous epic flop Heaven's Gate, John Boorman was amazingly able to salvage his career and would go on to direct the engaging and brutal Arthurian fantasy Excalibur (1981), The Emerald Forest (1985) and the critically acclaimed The General (1998). Perhaps even more amazing, however is that Exorcist II: The Heretic itself has also gained a retrospective cult following with its small fan base citing the aesthetic merits of its effects, cinematography and Morricone score as justification for a more positive widespread reappraisal for Boorman's pretentious dog of a sequel. I cannot even begin to imagine the kind of banned substances they must be acting under the influence of to arrive at such an opinion. To cut straight to the point Exorcist II: The Heretic is a rambling, turgid, wholly misconceived, completely incomprehensible and depressing mess which is not even redeemed from oblivion by the fact that it is at least proficiently made and performed. It is a film that thoroughly warrants every criticism ever levelled at it and one that should be at the forefront of any serious discussion about the worst sequels in cinematic history. It's only conceivable appeal must lie with die hard bad movie aficionado's and those who derive a perverse, almost sado-masochistic enjoyment from attempting to decipher the hidden meaning behind completely unfathomable and god awful films which don't actually have any real meaning at all.
Recommended? You must be fucking joking?
Exorcist II: The Heretic is available on both UK region two or US region one DVD courtesy of Warner Bros and can be purchased either a stand alone release or alternatively as part of numerous box sets containing both this and the other films in the Exorcist series. It should however be noted that every available DVD version to date, to the best of my knowledge, contains director John Boorman's original 118 minute cut of the film, as opposed to the re-edited, shorter 110 minute version released theatrically and on video. Gluttons for punishment who wish to own both cuts might therefore wish to seek out an older VHS copy in addition to the Warner DVD.
Exorcist II: The Heretic (Warner Home Video - UK R2 DVD):amazon.co.uk
Thanks for that Myersfan, I'm glad that you enjoyed it.
The first time I watched Exorcist II: The Heretic was in my teens, before I had actually even seen Friedkin's original film and from what I recall I was totally bemused by it. I've revisted a couple of times on DVD since then and starngly enough when you watch it again after you've got over the fact that it's not so much a horror film but a so-called "metaphysical thriller" far from getting better it actually gets even worse. To be honest I have no problem with the fact Boorman and co took a different. more spiritual, introspective approach instead of making a straight up horror film. My problem lies with the fact that it's so garbled, pretentious and crammed with so much stupid dialogue. You honerstly wouldnt guess that Boorman and his "creative associate" Rospo Pallenberg (presumably that's industry speak for someone who meddled in necessarily with the original script?) re-wrote the darn thing half a dozen times during production would you?
Sure there are some striking visuals, but in all honesty the only halfway decent scenes are at the end where Pazuzu takes the form of Regan in order to seduce Father Lamont into killing the real Regan, and even that is really just a tame, half-hearted, tacked on reprise of similar scenes in The Exorcist.
As far as I'm concerned its reputation as one of the worst sequels ever is well deserved. However, I still think that everyone should make a point of seeing Exorcist II: The Heretic at least once just so they can see just how bad it is for themselves.
Well my personal favourite is Burton's immortal line...
"I've flown this route before. It was on the wings of a demon"
A few other guilty offenders also delivered (funnily enough) by Burton...
"The power!! it's getting nearer. Can't you feel it? The power is immense. It fills me. I can do anything!"
Don't you understand that I was face to face with the Evil that's inside her? Your machine has proved scientifically that there's an ancient demon locked within her!"
"You realize what you're up against don't you? Evil!!! Evil is a spiritual being, alive and living, perverted and perverting, weaving its way insidiously into the very fabric of life!"
Now I realise Burton was probably pickled with drink at the time Exorcist II: The Heretic was made but nevertheless I'm amazed that he was able to deliver some of those lines whilst retaining a straight face. Some of Father Lamont's dialogue makes the ravings of your average televangelist sound reasonable and, combined with Burton's melodramatic, comically overwrought performance results in the character coming across as a volatile crackpot which I can't imagine was ever the intention.
Out of intertest mrb were you just curious as to which lines I had in mind? Or were you contesting the view that the dialogue in the film is stupid? If the latter be the case then obviously you're entitled to your views, but I maintain that much of it is incomprehensible, silly nonsense.
I'm sure Exorcist II: The Heretic probably does have at least a fan or two on these forums so if anyone does indeed feel it's either a misunderstood gem or a so bad it's good treat then I'd love to hear your thoughts. Contrasting opinions are always a good thing!
Incidentally Warner by all accounts put out an accompanying book rather imaginatively entitled The Making of Exorcist II: The Heretic around the time of the films original theatrical release. I've just put in an order for a cheap used paperback copy on Amazon Marketplace as this strikes me as one of those instances where the story of the films production is probably going to be more entertaining than the film itself.
To be honest the only versions I've ever owned/seen of Exorcist II: The Heretic is Boorman's orginal 118 minute cut of the film. Currently I own the UK DVD and before that I owned the second British VHS re-issue which Warner put out as part of their "Terror Vision" range in the mid nineties. While my memory is hazy I'm fairly sure that release featured Boorman's preferred longer cut too.
However, a look at the BBFC website indicates that the UK theatrical release used the shorter re-cut version of the film as in all likelihood did the Warner pre-cert VHS and the late eighties VHS re-issue. Perhaps someone can confirm this for me?
As I've never seen the shorter re-edited theatrical cut I can't really make any comparisons personally. However, the alternate versions section on the films Internet Movie Database page does give quite a detailed list of the differences between the different cuts. Looking at that list I'd say that any fans of this film in possession (no pun intended) of an older VHS copy in addition to the DVD are well advised to hold onto it assuming they wish to own both versions.
Well, I didn't thought it was quite as bad as you wrote, but it's certainly a sequel that I won't revisit too regularly:
"Exorcist II: The Heretic"
It's one of those movies I've been avoiding like the plague for years based on its exceptionally bad reputation as one of the worst mainstream horror sequels ever made and having finally faced "Exorcist II", I can see this being mentioned even today by cautious studio suits whenever a director is in danger of moving too far away from the tried and tested formula of a soon-to-be-sequelized genre hit.
That's not to say it's not an interesting viewing experience, because you can watch an ambitious failure, in which the makers' and the audiences' idea of what this film should be about are drifting further and further apart into totally different directions with each scene.
Visually stunning and beautifully scored by none less than Ennio Morricone, the plot is utter pancake though including a "dream machine" (which isn't really THAT hysterically funny as I was led to believe, but still WAY off track!).
Director John Boorman- despite giving us the tense and gripping blueprint for many "backwood horrors" to come with "Deliverance"- seems to have had a somewhat more "spiritual" goal for this one totally at odds with what the audience wanted- and STILL hasn't been served with even after 3 further attempts to revive the success of "The Exorcist": To see the eternal battle between good and evil being fought out in the "here" and "now" of our reality again, like in the original- but "Heretic"- as all of the other sequels/prequels- has nothing to do with the "reality" of any cinema going audience.
It'll probably take "Warner" (or "Morgan Creek" for that matter) a REMAKE of the first film to FINALLY meet the needs of the multiplex crowds, sad but true.
Watch out for Max Von Sydow reprising his role of Father Merrin in a couple of flashbacks, which will remind you of what a great make up job they did on Von Sydow while "aging" him in the original, as he's playing a younger Merrin, closer to his actual age at the time of shooting.
And yes, you'll get Linda Blair as teenage Regan alongside a hopelessly over-acting Richard Burton as the priest of choice for this one.
It's safe to say that "Heretic" certainly wasn't an ideal springboard for Blair to proceed an A-list career...
The problem with a flawed movie like this is that once people have stopped taking it seriously, they usually miss out on the occassionally interesting and more ambitious bits....now even more so than back then.
Obviously, a lot of ideas and craftsmanship went into "Exorcist II", too bad they went into the utterly wrong direction for most of the running time.
This is also one horror (in more than one sense of the word) that I've never seen purely because of it's dreadful reputation. If it were a stand alone then I might have been tempted, but Exorcist is one of my all time faves and I wouldn't want its impact upon me tarnished by a crap sequel, as this, a priori, clearly seems to be.
I quite like it myself, though it needed a truly epic Exorcist II - Part 2
Also
"You realize what you're up against don't you? Evil!!! Evil is a spiritual being, alive and living, perverted and perverting, weaving its way insidiously into the very fabric of life!"
is a great line, but then I do like hearing Richard Burton say insidious
__________________
Life, Don't talk to me about Life.
This is also one horror (in more than one sense of the word) that I've never seen purely because of it's dreadful reputation. If it were a stand alone then I might have been tempted, but Exorcist is one of my all time faves and I wouldn't want its impact upon me tarnished by a crap sequel, as this, a priori, clearly seems to be.
Pinback I wouldn't let the dreadful reputation put you off seing it entirely. Personally speaking the wretchedness of Exorcist II: The Heretic actually increased rather than tarnished my appreciation of The Exorcist.
Nice to see some slightly contrasting opinions on this film by the way.
I have mixed feelings about Mark Kermode. On one hand I've enjoyed some of his writing, he has an engaging and charismatic screen presence and, above all, he is one of the most genre film friendly mainstream film critics there is.
However, I must say that his obsession with promoting the brilliance of The Exorcist at every available opportunity is a bit tiresome. Fair enough, everyone has their personal favourite films at the end of the day, but Kermode seems to namedrop The Exorcist in every other review, article or broadcast he does. Enough already. I personally found some of his recent anti-Tarantino rants to be a tad OTT too, as funny as they were.
His views on Exorcist II: The Heretic are pretty much bang on the money. It's a sequel to The Exorcist directed by someone who had utter contempt for that film and wasn't shy about saying so. It beggars belief that no-one at Warner Bros ever realised that with somone with that attitude towards the original film at the helm they were headed for a disaster. One thing I didn't agree with though was Kermode's dismissal of most of Boorman's subsequent work. Personally I've always thought that Excalibur, whilst more than a little overblown, was a great film.
DVD
:
Linear Mode
DVD