Average Rating: 3.5/10
Reviews Counted: 125
Fresh: 14 | Rotten: 111
A mediocre, gory horror film, nowhere near the quality of the 1973 original.
Average Rating: 3.3/10
Critic Reviews: 23
Fresh: 1 | Rotten: 22
A mediocre, gory horror film, nowhere near the quality of the 1973 original.
liked it
Average Rating: 2.8/5
User Ratings: 78,109
Planned for years, but plagued by problems such as the death of director John Frankenheimer before production had even begun and the exiting of star Liam Neeson, the fourth installment of the Exorcist saga finally got off the ground with Paul Schrader (Affliction, Auto Focus) behind the camera and Stellan Skarsgård filling the shoes left empty by Neeson. But the pitfalls didn't stop there, as Morgan Creek decided against their initial approach assigned to Schrader after seeing his finished cut,
R, 1 hr. 54 min.
Aug 20, 2004 Wide
Oct 25, 2005
$41.8M
Warner Bros. Pictures
All Critics (131) | Top Critics (23) | Fresh (16) | Rotten (113) | DVD (28)
The serious Catholic themes that made the original film genuinely disturbing have been flattened out into a cartoonish backstory pitting Merrin against Nazi storm troopers.
As shocking as an Dokken album cover and, finally, as pious as The Passion of the Christ.
Never feels like anything other than generic, brain-dead, Dolby-jolt, multiplex hackwork -- I kept expecting Skarsgard's habitually catacomb-prowling Merrin to bump flashlights with Lara Croft.
It rates fairly high on both the Scare-O-Meter and Gross-Out Scale, with an early hyena attack guaranteed to have you flinching in terror.
By the time the three or four false endings are finished and the credits roll, moviegoers will be left wondering whether Schrader's version will be released on DVD.
Plenty violent. And bloody. And gory. What it isn't -- not really -- is scary.
An utter violation of anything that ever made The Exorcist memorable... just gaudy effects and things jumping out to say "boo!"
Brutal. Not for kids.
More than 30 years after the original hit screens, along comes the very best of the sequels.
Most of the movie feels nothing like an Exorcist film.
This is not horror. It's sadism.
Flawed, but still good.
Some things are better left mysterious, and some movies better left unmade.
Reams of tedious exposition finally give way to a random jumble of horror movie clichés, rising to a shrill pitch of hysteria that is never remotely frightening.
It isn't quite hell, but clambering to the end of this dusty remnant of an idea is certainly purgatory.
One would think studios would shy away from this dead horse; I guess the power of crap compels them.
What is rather horrifying is how this would-be thriller manages the bizarre feat of being simultaneously dull and completely ridiculous.
Considering that The Exorcist is one of the greatest horror films that has ever been made, Exorcist-The Beginning is a total disappointment. What surprises me is that the film boasts a good cast. However this film really doesn't cut it as a horror film. The film is supposed to be scary, considering it is a sequel to
October 11, 2011
Super Reviewer
Oh my goodness! This was like Indiana Jones and the Pazuzu demon! Lots of horror and action sequences, a 1940's desert, Nazis, an underground temple, CGI dogs, evil artifacts, natives vs. the British Army, a huge Evil-Dead showdown at the end, Biblical references - it's all there. There are nice nods to the Exorcist
June 27, 2007Super Reviewer
| 35% | The Hangover Part II |
| 25% | Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Par... |
| 81% | Kung Fu Panda 2 |
| 44% | Cowboys & Aliens |
| 83% | Rise of the Planet of the Apes |
| 25% | Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Par... |
| 88% | Lady and the Tramp |
| 69% | A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas |
| 21% | Fireflies in the Garden |
| 45% | The Rebound |
Journey 2 Not Worth the Trip
What are his 10 best movies ever?
See the all-new action-packed trailer!
Five new Marvelous pictures