User Reviews

I tried to like it, but after some 10 minutes into the movie I began to fear that this was a complete and utter dud. And it turned out I was right.

The bad: it is suppose to be horror, but it isnt horrifying for one minute. A bit freaky and strange, but definitely not scary. And I wanna get scared watching such a movie. That is the whole point of making horror movies.

More bad: besides a wonderful performance by the ever great Ellen Burstyn, none of the other actors impressed me. The 2 kids, who were possessed were okay, but not terrific either. But the other actors were plain average or even below average.

Defnitely an insult to the classic original from 1973, which was an absolute shocker of a classic!

Wow, this was really bad.

The original "The Exorcist" was a great horror movie with many intense and horrific moments and great memorable characters. I haven't personally seen the sequels and other installments so I really can't talk too much about them. The Exorcist: Believer is considered a direct sequel to the first Exorcist, I kind of expected this one wasn't going to be great but I didn't expect it to be this bad.

The production and the costumes were pretty standard which made it feel, at times, a television movie setting and the camerawork was mostly generic despite having a few shot compositions that looked pretty good. Even with some good camerawork, the messy narrative and direction and the use of horror cliches and annoying jump scares just drags the movie down and ends up making things eye-rolling. Director and Writer David Gordon Green has made a few movies I liked like "George Washington (2000), Snow Angels, and Joe" and Green tries to create something different for the installment. Unfortunately his writing and directing doesn't really offer much because the writing is all over the place with moments that are quite laughable alongside the bland direction.

Honestly, the performances from the cast members are not really good as the performances felt poor, dry, and not very convincing. Leslie Odom Jr. And Ann Dowd are actors I like and they seem to be trying their best but unfortunately they aren't able to keep hold on their roles. Ellen Burstyn is absolutely wasted in this movie. As mentioned, the narrative tries to explore some new characters and territories but the narrative isn't good and none of the characters were interesting to the point that it was really boring at certain points of the movie.

The soundtrack was pretty generic. The dialogue is really bad with certain monologue moments being poor and sometimes laughable. Certain lighting moments were bad, the make-up and costumes looked alright but there were certain moments that made them look cheap. Also, the movie has some of the worst editing I have seen in awhile which makes Bohemian Rhapsody's editing look like a masterpiece.

Overall, I don't understand why it's necessary to have a new installment of the Exorcist. At this point, as much as I like some of Green's early work, I'm convinced his future works aren't going to be really good anymore.

"The Exorcist: Believer" is a film whose trailer was better and which promised an old school style story but adding new elements, the result was not terrible but it was bad. The script starts without much interest, the scenes of the first symptoms of demonic possession were quite simple and did not create tension, the exorcism scenes fail to stand out and feel illogical, during this part of the film it manages to have a couple of good scenes. Using characters from the original film makes no sense, their participation is almost irrelevant but it is nice to see them again. Within the aforementioned script, an attempt was made to give it a new perspective with the theme of religions and a union with a common good, but it completely fails to innovate and they treat it in a simple way. The performances are average, the two possessed girls do not achieve the masterful performance that Linda Blair achieved in 1973. David Gordon Green fails miserably in his work as a director, the cinematography is decent, on the soundtrack it is appreciated to hear the legendary "Tubular Bells" although with certain changes that are not poorly achieved and the makeup effects look gloomy. The positive points are few and the negative ones are more, a soulless sequel.

John Boorman can sleep a little easier tonight; he is no longer responsible for directing the worst film in The Exorcist franchise. Why, in the name of God, does DGG bring back Ellen Burstyn just to treat the character of Chris McNeil with such contempt? Watching this movie I started to wonder if DGG hates William Friedkin. That's the level of disrespect on display. This is the worst film I've seen in some time, and in this day and age, that's saying something. It's one of those movies in which a character, or in this case 3 or 4 characters, stop to tell the audience exactly... What. Is. Happening. On. Screen. More than a bad film, it's an enraging one. The option should exist to award zero stars. It's existence is a blasphemy.

After defiling the Halloween saga with his insipid sequel trilogy, David Gordon Green brings his desecrating vision to yet another beloved horror classic and leaves no stone unturned to insult its unparalleled legacy. Nothing less than an eyesore, The Exorcist: Believer is one of the worst films to surface this year and makes for a wretched, unholy & sacrilegious mess that itself is in desperate need of an exorcism.

Also co-written by Gordon Green (Halloween Kills & Halloween Ends), the story never is able to create any sense of intrigue throughout its runtime and only gets worse as it progresses. There is no emotional weight to its setup, it is severely lacking in atmosphere, is downright ineffective in the scary department with its tired tropes & clichéd attempts. And characters remain distant as well. There isn't one aspect that's executed well.

Where the original was pioneering in its use of horror set pieces, practical effects, sound design & storytelling, this follow-up chapter has got nothing to capture our attention. Everything it tries fails to work out, its attempts to scare the viewers only ends up being hilarious and what it does with Chris MacNeil is not only facepalm-inducing but also mind-numbingly moronic. Acting from all is forgettable and the finale is a neutered, dumbed-down version.

Overall, The Exorcist: Believer is an incompetently directed, shoddily scripted and awfully acted sequel that has no understanding of what makes The Exorcist such an enduring masterpiece of its genre. Much worse than what the negative reception will have you thinking, the film has zero redeemable qualities, offers more laughs than scares by playing out like a parody than a proper sequel and is horror filmmaking at its most bland & uninteresting. In a word, cringeworthy.

It's so obvious that the 10 star reviews on here are fake/paid for, considering they all have very similar wording. I'm a huge horror fan and try to watch every new horror movie that releases, so believe me when I tell you this movie sucks. David Gordon Green destroys yet another beloved horror franchise, but i'm sure we all saw that coming after what he did to Halloween. Don't waste your money going to see this movie in the theater, maybe then David Gordon Green will get the message that no one wants to endure his garbage storylines anymore. No one expected this to be anywhere near as good as the original, but it still managed to be a massive let down.

I'd like to think I'm a discerning film watcher and I thought this film was good. Given the genre and the fact that it is capitalizing on the classic Exorcist film, I thought it did a good job. It has fine actors/acting. It incorporated tropes from the original without being too on the nose. If you call this an "insult" to the original, then you aren't paying attention. This is a continuation of the genre with Ellen Burstyn incorporated into the film. What would you expect.

Also, it was well shot. It was well paced. It kept my interest and was what I expected. I really don't see why it is rated so low.

Horror movies just aren't made like they used to be. How these "horror" movies like Five Nights at Freddy's, Scream 2023, Megan, There's Something Wrong with the Children, and soooo many more like this receive an IMDb rating of 7 stars, yet this movie is rated in the 4's is mind boggling to me.

Exorcist: The Believer is not a new concept. It's not a unique storyline that's never been done before, but it is a good movie. It's a possession film with plenty of jump scares, moments that creep you out, and moments that make you want to turn the lights on. To me, THAT'S what makes a good scary movie! The acting was great, the storyline (although done before) was a good one that kept you on your toes and entertained. Trust me, in comparison to the "horror movies" being advertised today, this one is worth the watch.

PROS: Strong performances from most of the cast. A solid set up in the first block of the film that makes us empathize with the characters.

CONS: After the set up and possessions, the film flatlines. There seem to be too many ideas floating around that never get handled properly. The creepy factor was null and void. A couple of jump scares are thrown in. Perhaps the film's biggest mistake is having the legacy character, Chris (Ellen Burstyn), wasted here as the studio's cliche cash grab for nostalgic fans. An overall weak script, cringe dialogue, and plenty of corny group exorcism moments to go around. The film really treats its audience like they're stupid. Skip this and watch the original instead.

Sometimes it's ok to just let these classic movies live on as their own thing. I don't know who thought it was a good idea to give the director a shot at this franchise because... those 3 new Halloween movies are atrocious. Not funny, not scary, did not need to be made.

I was bored to tears with this film and kept looking at my watch to see how close it was to being over. The characters were forgettable, the story is nothing new, and I had to stop myself from laughing out loud at the acting quite a number of times.

Just watch the original and then if you want a follow up, watch the director's cut that has some extra scenes.

Watching this movie is like undergoing a two-hour exorcism through boredom. What started out as mildly intriguing albeit unimaginative premise devolves into a silly, hollow variation on the original. Throw in a generous serving of detritus and effluvia, a touch of CGI, and a disorganized multi-faith ritual, and you're done! I started looking at my watch after about thirty minutes to calculate how much more tedium remained.

Even the demon Pazuzu was nowhere nearly as entertaining as the original. Yes, there is the requisite foul language, but Pazuzu was also snide and sarcastic... there's nothing like "Your mother's in here with us, Karras. Would you like to leave a message? I'll see that she gets it." I was patiently waiting for some equally as clever and rude demonic quips, but there were none to be had.

The Exorcist is a masterpiece of cinema, horror or otherwise. It's been done. Move on.

I'm not giving it any stars.

Honestly must be the worse film I watched. No storyline and as for a "horror" I get more scared looking in the mirror and seeing myself. I paid £15 to watch it odeon Lux and it was a shambles.

I understand that it's nothing like the original but you don't see how these kids get possessed they just turn up from the forest they get lost in. I honestly have nothing else to say other than do not waste your money or time in going out of your way to see this.

I am honestly gutted was really looking forward to it!!

Please do not watch this film. It's honestly god dam terrible. The film is so bad I've gone out of my way to write this review.

The Exorcist: Believer follows the iconic horror film that has stood the test of time. Released in 1973. The sequel tells the chilling story of a 2 young girls possessed by a demonic entity. The movie is as it predecessor known for its intense and terrifying scenes, as well as its exploration of faith and the battle between good and evil.

The performances in The Exorcist are outstanding, particularly of the 2 possessed girls. The portrayal of the demonic possessions are both disturbing and captivating. The makeup and special effects used to bring the possessed to life are impressive.

The Exorcist is not for the faint of heart. It's filled with shocking and unsettling moments that will leave you with goosebumps. The jump scares are a bit to predictable yet a few had me skip a heartbeat for a minute.

If you enjoy supernatural horror and don't mind being scared out of your wits, The Exorcist is your type of movie. Just make sure you set the vibe right and dare to see it on the big screen.

Another possession movie that does the same thing every other possession movie has done since the original Exorcist. The fact that the exorcist title was used for this movie is a shame.

There wasn't anything frightening about this at all. The build up felt like it took too long and the ending felt rushed. Everything else in between was boring. There were moments I laughed at the dialogue, I'm sure it wasn't intentional humor. There isn't any creativity as to the demon that possessed the girls, the film basically wants you to believe it's the same evil from the original. It's the same recycled idea of someone trying to get in contact with a dead relative and summons an evil spirit.

The whole idea of two girls being possessed at the same time didn't add anything to the film.

There are many more things about this film that didn't work, just think of a cliche possession movie and add the exorcist title and you have this film. Do not waste your time.

I was a huge fan of the original and best 1973 film of the exorcist.

That was really a scarry horror film which made a huge impact 50 years ago.

The original sequel part 2 the heretic was a welcomed addition and then we got a different story for part 3.

Part 3 was weird entry. Others liked it others didn't but it tried to be something different.

Then the prequels arrived around 2005 but they were average at best.

I preffered the begining over dominion.

And we are here at 2023 with a brand new exorcist sequel which use the halloween 2018 and the saw X formula.

Problem is....the 1973 magic is gone.

We will never get those magic days back.

Sadly the film is too predictable and uses the same formula over and over again.

Maybe we got too much similar films all those years and we got tired but anyhow this new entry is nowhere near the 1973 film.

There are a few good things like the return of a few original 1973 cast members and the exorcisms were done right but at some point u may get bored.

Anyhow this is better than nothing and u can check it out but don't expect to witness what u witnessed back in 1973. That's 4 sure.

Grade B-

I knew this was never going to surpass the original, but the trailers looked decent, so what the heck, right? The first red flag was the director. He did a pretty good job on the 2018 Halloween. Then the other two came out and oh my, talk about how to ruin a good thing. Now he decides to take the driver seat to one of the most iconic horror movies ever made. The two child actors do a good job, they do have some creepy scenes and the movie has some decent parts to it, but overall, I left the theater just feeling like things could have been executed better. Now I hear that this will be a trilogy now too? Yeah, no thanks.

If you're gonna compare this to the original than you're not looking at it the right way. This film actually tried to make to take the story and place it in a plausible future that gives way to multiple possibilities. There's elements of the original that are noticeable like hints of the cinematography, the musical tones and callback lines but this movie is a story about the father facing his past and coming to terms with the decisions he's made. I get how it's not super scary but realistically in this day and age, horror has a hard time delivering shock to its audiences. This isn't the 70's. People aren't going to have the same kind of reaction as they did back then. Everyone was expecting this to be as reactionary as the first and were given another film that's about demonic possession which are a dime a dozen now but I think people over time will realize this film isn't as bad as they thought. If it were called anything other than Exorcist it may have had a better chance and people would have enjoyed it more and seen as pretty solid film rather than a poor shot at revitalizing a classic film. I urge anyone who sees it don't be thinking that the original did this scene better or this was more scary. Try to see if the story on its own has some worth and maybe the sprinklings of the original tonalities will make it seem like a good nod to a once great horror instead of a failure towards one.

LIKES:

The Acting: -A strong cast to get a movie like this to come to life is essential, and I felt many did their jobs quite well and brought the demons out to play.

-Burstyn does well in her role when she arrives back to take on the Devil again. She's strong, has this commanding presence and gives inspiring speeches that work with the theme of this movie.

-Nettles is fine as the worried mom and there are times she kills her performance, but there was more that could have been done with the character to pull her full effect out.

-As for Odom Jr, my favorite of the bunch. He's tough, he's got great delivery, and I love the question of faith role he has with this direction and how much I believed the struggle.

The Setting/Cinematography: -The movie's chilling atmosphere comes from the setting that this film takes place in... home and how even here you might not be safe.

-While we have plenty of movies that use this same setting, what this movie did was really use effects and the camera to make the horror come to life.

-Believer's camera work finds all the right filters and angles for me to help add that extra oomph to help make the discomfort come out even more.

-Those shadows are haunting, and just big enough to be unsettling. Then you find them hitting the right movement, the close ups, and the dynamic movement to get just that perfect shot for the horrors coming with it.

-It's one of my favorite aspects about it, and having that dynamic movement helps mix things up and add just that pop of spook factor you want.

The Sound Editing/Voice Work: -Most possession movies are about adding that haunting noise and effects to help make the demon's work come to life.

-Believer did this for me well, the underlying musical gestures the start of the magic that they brought with the sound.

-Then the growling, creaking, and background noises come in next and those things add that undertone of terror that something lurks in the realm.

-Still not enough, then get set for the louder things to come. The demon's voice really has a great use, a mixing of two adolescent voices with the familiar throaty deep tone work as the demon plays it's game.

-The writing of the movie comes out the best with the delivery and the voices, finding just the right tone, pitch, and throaty texture and switching them in and out.

-It adds character to the victims and the scenes, and I really felt this part was sort of the character of the movie.

-The finish is the screaming, done by everyone, but all conveying the terror and horror as the torturing continues and the girls convey that terror of being in the hands of this monster.

Movement Acting: -Nothing can be more chilling than watching a body writhe and wiggle in torture conveying the unnatural forces at play.

-Believer accomplished this, the girls talented in how they bend, twitch, move, and roll about as their internal fight for their soul continues.

-Their control was impressive, the coordination and direction to really make the girls give you skin crawling angle and actions that convey that demonic control.

-Head jerking to painful degrees, slow tweaks of the head and smiles of sinister grinning and hunger, and the powerful lunges that are a bit too realistic.

-The best part of the acting for me and worthy of praise for what they accomplished.

The makeup: -The original did it well, and this one has fantastic prosthetic work to make the gross factor awaken.

-Believer's looks are sinister, disgusting, and pulsing with that horrific detail that made me grit my teeth and shudder.

-Flaking skin, body scars, blood, and decaying nails are some of the things that await you, assisting with the decay that demon possession has on people.

-While the eyes, lips, and more supernatural elements really come out in that movie glory, with pale clammy skin, those unholy yellow eyes, and black residue oozing out of every crevice.

-Certainly my favorite part of the movie, the familiar designs really come to life and hold well in this movie, and computer assistance does not make it too fake or off putting to not be able to handle.

DISLIKES:

Not Scary: -Unsettling, sure. I mean possession is not something to mess around with and that was the part that made me feel the most scared.

-The movie for seasoned pros of the movie though are going to be bored as the scares are really drowned out by the preachiness of the movie.

-Believer's direction ifs familiar enough, but the movie just can't get back to the roots and storytelling when lost to the more moral and divine playing.

-Throw in less scare tactics, some jump scares that went wrong, and simplifying the actual story horror and I see the complaints that most have.

Burstyn's Cameo needed more: -This is in no way a spoiler, but when you go out of your way to play up a big involvement of the franchise favorite and don't utilize it, you get disappointment.

-The times she is on screen she rocks with her delivery, but there was so much more to use the queen on, and we just exorcised it without a second thought.

-The new cast has potential, but they weren't enough to offset the bait and switch with a character who made more speeches than added to the story, including the special moments that were meant to have more gusto.

Where were the thrills?

-Another boring element is feeling nothing in regards to the suspense and thrills that the first one had.

-This does have to do with the fact that movies have done everything to death, but still, a little more challenge, dive, and testing of characters, building into the story like the others could have gone a long way.

-But that wasn't the case. Believer takes a lot of side stories and tries to give this a religious kick that feels party Sunday school lesson.

-While the heart of those lessons is there and important in terms of execution it was sloppy, to the side, and feels quite superficial for what these movies have done better in the past.

-And even more so, it just felt like there was too much in one film and everyone was trying to pull equal pieces to have everything in one movie.

-This just led to a diluted movie that started baring its fangs then put them away.

The Character/Acting/Story/Writing Is Messy -I mentioned this earlier, but because of everything being jammed into one movie... you can guess it gets sloppy at times and this too I felt with time in the movie.

-Character development is inconsistent, sometimes starting to go deep, and other times a flicker before we get into preachy/overdramatic moments.

-Some of the acting is top notch, and delivers character moments that I'll remember, like Odom and the girls, but forgettable for Nettles and several other people that feel lost to editing.

-The lines go from realistic, haunting, and a real battle of faith, to again citing lines and feeling like a Christian delivered movie that feel out of place and forced.

-And the story holds so many good elements, but again, fades to very bloated moments that are side tracks and very gospel like, not flowing.

-It all leads to the movie feeling like it still needs a little more tweaking and planning, and any potential sequels really going back to the roots, picking some stories, and making sure its character centric and spooky.

-In doing so, this might just help get the Exorcism to be a success, rather than feeling like another cash grab.

THE VERDICT: The Exorcist Believer certainly has the modern feel in regards to the cinema level of craft, filming, and makeup. I found the most enjoyable parts to be the physical shooting and creation aspects that helped bring some really cool makeup effects to the genre. It's haunting with sound, fantastic with moving the camera, and really helping establish the true terror and soulless nature involving Hell. Sadly, the movie suffers on a lot of other things for me that take away from the film and sort of buffer what I think the movie was trying to accomplish. A cameo that is very limited is just the start as scares, thrills and cohesive film got lost in preachy dialog, too many stories, and what felt like a very crammed movie. The result is not the worst movie of the summer, but certainly a weaker film that lacks something the first movie (and some of the ones that followed) had. Given all this, I hate to say you optimize your money by waiting for this one at home, with Saw X still being my choice for horror/thriller movie.

My scores are:

Horror: 6.5-7.0 Movie Overall: 5.5-6.0.

Exorcist The Believer Rating 2.7/5 Horror, Thriller

They completely missed the essence of the original 1973 film, The Exorcist.

Most of the people in the theater were elderly. Maybe they were excited because it had a sequel, but it mostly ended up being disappointing. It was cheesy watching the two kids being exorcised. There was no thrill. It felt like being on a roller coaster that only goes straight without any ups or downs.

Though the cinematography was decent, it helped in preventing the movie from being boring. The acting was okay but nothing special. There were some jump scares due to loud sound effects. But overall, it lacked the thrill and terror you expect from a horror movie. That's why people watch horror films, to be scared. At least it wasn't as ridiculous as The Nun, where the monster gained powers in the end. 😅

I saw The Exorcist: Believer the day it opened, and, as a longtime devotee of the original, I worried it would be disappointing but still hung onto some hope that it would be OK. Sadly, I was thoroughly disappointed. This movie felt like someone arguing frantically for two hours that "movies are supposed to be entertainment" as a way of drowning out their conscience telling them (accurately) that they have, in fact, made a crap movie. Obvious and pointless jump-scares, amateurishly written soliloquies about good v. Evil, uninspired and thus desperate-feeling callbacks to the original, attempts at pulling your heartstrings by hands that evidently don't know where the human heart is located in the body - yes, this film has it all, and it's all dumb.

I do applaud David Gordon Green's decision to make a direct sequel instead of attempting a reboot (or, far worse, a "reimagining"), but in so doing he made a big mistake: he pandered. Movies like this feel for all the world as if the filmmakers - instead of you know, doing some actual writing and working hard on the story and script - gather everything they think you love about the original and modern horror in general and cram it all in at twice the volume and one-tenth the quality. That's pandering. It's like a barter-system version of someone pleading with you to please love them.

My suggestion: skip the overpriced cinema ticket and just re-watch the original Exorcist, which is still terrifying 50+ years on, followed immediately by Exorcist III, which has somehow gotten worthier over the years.