The Exorcist: Believer
The Exorcist franchise is at its best when it is building itself up through character and surprising the audience with complex narrative choices. This is something that Green initially appears to succeed at working to. His film, the first in a supposed trilogy, begins with a single father (Leslie Odom Jr.) and his daughter (Lidya Jewett). She misses her mother, and with a friend (Olivia Marcum), they set about trying to speak to the other side. Much like The Exorcist III, its titular ceremony appears far from its mind as the story soon slinks into a mystery about a missing child and the complicated ramifications of that. It’s involving and well-paced even if some of the writing around Odom Jr. was too saintly for me. Ann Dowd is also there.
But it is as if in an instant that Green remembered he was making an Exorcist movie at which point he—pardon the language—shits the bed. For Green and McBride, an Exorcist movie in 2023 is little more than a run of the mill possessed teenage girl movie with CGI goo and few fresh ideas.
When Ellen Burstyn re-appears for the first time in the franchise’s history for what amounts to not much but an extended cameo, it was as if I could see Believer’s potential evaporating right before my very eyes. By the time the two girls are strapped into chairs with zealots hurling bible incantations at them, the movie had become a roll-call of possession and exorcism movie tropes that ceased to be properly effective many years ago. At least The Pope's Exorcist had Russell Crowe in Orson Welles drag riding around the countryside on a vespa.
To be perfectly honest, it’s almost offensive how little Green appears to care about actually saying anything. The Exorcist franchise has been around for fifty years, yet this is nearabout the weakest in terms of any genuine complex thoughts about the Catholic Church, religion and faith. Earlier this year, a small Australian indie horror called Godless: The Eastfield Exorcism was released that, for all of its faults, at least had something to say about how societies can too easily succumb to the whims of radicals (it’s on Tubi if you wish to try that one on at home this Halloween instead). This has no such concept of thought. But it does have voodoo.
At its best, the Exorcist movies are made by adults and for grown ups, with all of the critical thinking and emotional connections that comes with life’s experiences. They offer characters complex emotions with which to navigate, often fighting internal wars of the mind and soul as much as they are the wars of demonic possession. The Exorcist is a movie that confronted audiences in unimaginable ways. Nothing is as easy as simply turning on a switch and say “I believe!”. The Exorcist: Believer on the other hand is frustratingly uninquisitive about religion—which, given the shifting attitudes around it and our knowledge of the Catholic Church’s own sins these days feels like a dereliction of duty. In fact, it appears to even be pro-church.
It’s sad to see Believer turn it into anonymous fodder for kids. Content for teenagers who maybe know of the “Exorcist” brand but are allergic to old movies. Just as it is impossible to imagine anybody who did (and still does) find Friedkin’s 1973 classic so effective finding anything here to raise even a modest pulse, so too is it hard to fathom younger audiences being inspired to visit the original. There’s little here that hasn’t already been seen in a dozen other movies. And in many places, done better. If this had simply been titled Believer, I’d have probably had no idea this was even meant to be the same world. I might have also been more charitable. Which, for a film trying to launch a $400mil (!!) franchise, isn’t great.
Click here for more movies
No comments:
Post a Comment