“The Exorcist: Believer,” a 50th anniversary legacy sequel from Blumhouse that – like its recent “Halloween” 40th anniversary trilogy – ignores all the previous sequels and spinoffs, seems from its title to be a conscious reaction to the legendarily awful “Exorcist II: The Heretic” (1977). It’s hard to believe “Believer” couldn’t clear that low bar, but a case could be made that it’s actually worse.
To be sure, “Heretic” is a terrible movie. The demon’s inconsistent abilities make no sense and it’s so boring that even Linda Blair, an excellent child actor ably carrying the role of Regan into her teen years, can’t do anything with it. If you go awhile without rewatching it, you start to think maybe it’s bad in an interesting way. At least it deals with Regan’s trauma and digs into the mythos of Pazuzu, the demon that possessed her.
“Believer” is technically better, in that the plot makes sense and it might not be boring to someone who has never before seen a horror movie — which, to be fair, might be the target audience. It’s unlikely that writer-director David Gordon Green and co-writer Peter Sattler had “Exorcist” die-hards in mind when they decided to write a story about a demon’s (or two demons’? – the film doesn’t care to clarify) possession of a pair of tween girls without showing the slightest interest in the identity of the supernatural villain(s).
“The Exorcist: Believer” (2023)
Director: David Gordon Green
Writers: Peter Sattler (screenplay); David Gordon Green (screenplay/story); Scott Teems, Danny McBride (story)
Stars: Leslie Odom Jr., Ann Dowd, Ellen Burstyn
“Heretic” is a home-run swing strikeout where the batter misses by a mile and screws himself into the ground; “Believer” is a sacrifice bunt back to the pitcher for a double play. Take your pick of which is the better turn at the plate.
Shocking … in how it’s not scary
I don’t want to say “This is a good horror movie but it’s a bad ‘Exorcist’ movie” because I don’t believe in that argument. Also because this is actually a bad horror movie, too, in the sense that it’s not scary. Although it has a color palette of browns and blacks, and dusk-time lighting, and decent “searching through the dark woods” sequences, it builds no mood.
“Scares” come from flash-cut editing that would be lazy even in a YouTube video of horror-movie highlights. Two moments of extreme violence feel desperate and make no impact.
Green and Sattler hit all the religious tropes, but so mildly and predictably that they seem scared of religion – when, in fact, “Exorcist” films are supposed to make us scared of religious themes. William Peter Blatty — author of the two “Exorcist” books, writer of the first movie and writer-director of the third – was religious, and his fear of demons and worries about the dangers of exorcisms were real. He translated that to the audience.
“Believer’s” creators obviously believe in none of this. Maybe that doesn’t matter, because the title refers to main character Victor (Leslie Odom Jr.), whose daughter Angela (Lidya Jewett) is one of the two possessed girls, along with her buddy Katherine (Olivia O’Neill).
Victor is an atheist, as am I, but if I heard a demon’s voice coming from Angela’s mouth, I think I’d reconsider my stance. Victor does eventually come around, but this is as rote as a “journey to belief” gets.
Aiming for contrasts
The film presents some (on paper) interesting contrasts. The parents of Katherine are devoutly religious. Victor’s neighbor brings in a priestess with roots in the belief systems of black slaves; this calls to mind Haitian voodoo, but “Believer” is too PC to make the reference outright. A Catholic exorcist is there too, in order to have the title make sense.
Also, a woman who was going to be a nun but decided not to (Ann Dowd, doing her darndest) chips in as well. Oh, and there’s a classic “back up the truckload of cash” glorified cameo for original Chris MacNeil actress Ellen Burstyn, who had handed off the role to Sharon Gless for the 2016 TV series.
This cast of characters might make for an OK “Exorcist” Season 3 if we had time to dig into the nuances of their lives’ tragedies. “Believer” accidentally confirms that, without Blatty, this saga works best as a TV series, more about the buildup than the requisite scenes of kids tied to beds while possessed (although the TV series certainly did those scenes better than this movie).
I’m guessing “Believer’s” young actresses had fun riffing on what Blair did a half-century ago, and I can’t say any of these performers are bad. Playing out a story of a father seeing his child turn into a monster, and wondering if she is lost to him, Odom Jr. is serviceable. The problem is that this arc is one of the most common horror tropes, with the original “Exorcist” being one of the elite examples.
At least the other bad films try
“Heretic” and the prequels are pretty bad, but they at least nominally dig into Pazuzu lore or approach trauma – and the way demons pounce on that — from different angles. Having two girls be possessed could be a path to intrigue, but it ultimately means little.
Having a large cast of solid actors simply means more people are on screen. The tone switches from the saga’s traditional cold loneliness to an awkward loneliness, as everyone pretends to get along for the sake of a common goal.
“Exorcist: Believer” is content to retell the original film’s story but in a more predictable way. Or possibly, the creators of this film could think of no other way to do it. To say it’s worse than “Heretic” would be too mean, but at least that film tricks my mind into thinking there might be substance there, and it tries to justify its existence. “Believer” is just plain empty of inspiration.