The Exorcist: Believer ★★½

THE temptation with reviewing The Exorcist: Believer is not about being too precious over the original film.

It’s more about trying not to be too cynical.

If David Gordon Green and Danny McBride love the 1973 film as much as they claim, why use the name to make a so-called sequel?

The only DNA that the 2023 sequel shares with the original is in the genes of actress Ellen Burstyn who plays the same character in both films.

They can call their film a sequel all they want, but it’s a remake that changes, rather than advances, the compelling William Peter Blatty story.

Why not write and film your own demonic possession tale, rather than use William Freidkin’s creation as a sales tool?

Two obvious reasons – because the studio wanted things done exactly that way and because you creatively didn’t want to be accused of ripping-off the original.

So, don’t be annoyed if people who love the original judge you by its standards. The Exorcist is the greatest horror film ever made and one of the best films ever made full stop. Its influence on cinema over five decades has been profound and widespread and continues to this day.

The Exorcist: Believer is obviously technically well-made and acted and actually starts reasonably well with a slow-burn mystery for its first act.

But it quickly descends to little more than a standard and cliched experience with some unnecessary and woke culture inspired changes to the original.

It’s better than the terribly misjudged actual first sequel, Exorcist II: The Heretic, but not as interesting as the largely stand-alone second sequel Exorcist III which is renowned for having one of the best jump scares in cinema history.

Green and McBride also messed with Halloween, creating one out of three decent films, and now they are trying to ruin another classic.

They better not get their hands on Jaws or The Thing.