Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen Reviews

Page 2 of 7
March 26, 2015
Credit goes to Linda Blair and everyone who had the confidence in her to pull this off. Her performance is so heartbreaking and haunting it's a good parallel to the grandmother in the hospital story. The film works because it first makes you emotionally vulnerable before shocking you with the face of your worst nightmare.
November 3, 2012
Even after all these years, The Exorcist still stands not only as a classic in the horror genre but as a masterpiece of the cinematic form.
January 10, 2014
When a teenage girl is possessed by the devil, her only hope is an exorcism.

stars Linda Blair, Jason Miller, Ellen Burstyn, Max Von Sydow, Lee J. Cobb, Kitty Winn and Jack MacGowan.

directed by William Friedkin.
November 24, 2013
The Magic of This Movie Is That It Is Very Scary and yet You Can Never Take Your Eyes off it
October 21, 2013
When I first saw this film way back when I was about 14 years old I thought that this film was the scariest I had ever seen. Well, I've seen it several times since, and I'm not sure whether it's the scariest ever, but it still packs quiet a punch. It's been often copied but never duplicated and if you get a chance to see the director's cut from the year 2000, then you really should.
½ September 15, 2013
The new scenes don't really add much to the overall story which is still steady and slow moving, but the movie still has the power to shock after 40 odd years. You do have to wonder if this would ever get made these days...
July 24, 2013
Simply a more demonic and even more frightening version of the scariest film to ever be made, rounded off by spectacular effects and chilling performances, a film which will be scary for the rest of time. Truly brilliant.
July 13, 2013
I wont see it to this day ever
½ June 2, 2013
While still an absolute masterpiece of horror, the extended version of The Exorcist changed the ending to a more hopeful farewell...an act that was rather unnecessary. The other additional scenes, apart the infamous spider-walk, do nothing but slow the movie down. If you have no other way of watching this horror classic, by all means check it out, but the original cut is still the best way to go.
February 5, 2011
As bad as the original EXORCIST, as I said it's not so scary. But in this version I enjoyed the movie more because some boring scenes were removed and I found that there was nothing new in the story but there was something different.
March 15, 2013
Amazing film, everything works and I dont see a bit of weakness in this film. The version you've never seen shows scenes that compliment and add more to the already great film. There's nothing more to say, just watch it and be amazed and at one of the innovative horror films still to its day
January 19, 2013
The Scariest movie i've ever seen!
January 19, 2013
The only Truly scary movie I have ever seen. I have been on the hunt for a truly scary movie since. Grown to love the genre But none have ever scared me like this did. Still holds up very well. If you don't feel it you may already be possessed .
½ November 3, 2012
'The scariest film of all time?' I think not. Back in 1998, when The Exorcist was finally released after its well over a decade long ban was lifted, and I saw this with a friend, not expecting to be scared out of my wits as horror films rarely have that effect on me.

But at the time, I was left very disappointed as I was subjected to a boring, ponderous 70's horror, rather than a timeless chiller which had driven people to faint, vomit and commit suicide in its day. Upon a second viewing over the weekend, 13 years later, my opinion has improved somewhat, but scary it still was not. Interesting, yes, slow, afraid so, but was it boring? No. I think that if you find this boring then it just isn't your cup of tea and that should be left at that.

Horror films are not dissimilar to movies of any genre in the fact their impact is subjective. Some people scare very easily and like to be so. Others, like me, find themselves unaffected by it, mainly because of an inherent detachment, our inability to be drawn in enough to feel the fear.

I like to be chilled though and there are many chilling elements at work here. This is a bleak film and it played with you in throughout, setting it within an upper-class environment, one synonymous with comfort and protection and the fact that the 13-year-old Ragan canon be protected from Satan's possession implies that no-one is safe.

Then there's the protagonist priest, Damian Carras; Disturbed by a shaken faith, mourning the loss of his mother who he feels he has neglected. He smokes, drinks and ponders, moping in melancholy, almost the antithesis of what a priest should be, but he's likable in a way. So is Max von Sydow's titular Exorcist. Subtly tortured, but excellently played.

The effects are what you might expect from 1973, but are still effective in that context. This is more of a character study than an out right horror film, with the majority of its 127 minutes focusing on the relationships between the characters to each other and ultimately, God.

There was some of what I would consider to be major plot-holes though, such as the seemingly extraneous character of the Lt. Kinderman, again, excellently performed by Lee J. Cobb. He was a decent character but underused. He was introduced as a response to the death of a character who was presumably murdered by the possessed Regan, but beyond asking a few questions, he did little investigating.

In the end, she was a suspect in murder and was subsequently dismissed as such from get go, a point that was still dismissed by the film's conclusion, with makes little sense.

Overall, not as scary in 2011 as it was 38 years ago, in 1973, but for those with an interest in horror and decent 1970's film making, this is a prime example of what made that era, but personally, I have always seen the day that Star Wars broke the through the doldrums of low-key, high brow and dreary 70's cinema as one of the most important days in movie history.
½ November 1, 2012
To cap off the Halloween season this year, I review one of the scariest horror films there has ever been. This has stood the test of time with abounding horror, brilliant performances, and great effects for the time.

PLOT:Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) and her daughter, Regan (Linda Blair), are currently living in a big city while Chris is acting in a movie, shot by the drunken director, Burke Dennings (Jack MacGowran). While there, strange things start happening in the MacNeil household, for Regan claims her bed has been shaking and has been swearing heavily like she has never before. The doctors say its a problem with her temporal lobe, but things only go from bad to worse as they try to treat her. After seeing sights such as her daughter growling, levitating, and even changing voices, Chris becomes convinced that her daughter is possessed. She has a tough time find a priest to help, but she eventually stumbles across faith-stricken Father Karras (Jason Miller) and professional exorcist, Father Merrin (Max von Sydow), who has also been on expeditions to Africa for experience. These two must get the demon out of Regan or die trying. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.

ACTING:The performances in here are top-notch. Linda Blair has to be one of the best child actors of all-time for pulling off Regan MacNeil, a possessed child, at only about 9 years old. Jason Miller and Max von Sydow also played a couple great parts as the priests, Father Karras and Merrin; they played off of each other very well and worked intensely. The other shining stars would have been Ellyn Burstyn as distressed Chris MacNeil, Jack MacGowran as drunken Burke Dennings, Lee J. Cobb as Lt. Winderman, Mercedes McCambridge as the demon voice, and Eileen Dietz as the demon's face.

SCORE:The score is creepy and very memorable. The theme song, "Tubular Bells" by Mike Oldfield, has become one of the most memorable horror film themes in history. The rest of the score was pretty good too, and done in part by Jack Nitzche.

EFFECTS:The effects for this film's time were phenomenal, and they still are. The effects in here are super realistic, which makes them all the more scary. The blood, make-up, vomit, bed-shaking, head-turning, and illusioned effects were very great and made everything scary as ever.

OTHER CONTENT:This is one of the best horror films I've ever seen. Along with its previous rises, it doesn't stray too far from the book, has great editing, and is shot to scare. I've read the book before, and after seeing this, I notice only a slight change in dialogue and detail. Otherwise, all is down right. The director, William Friedkin, did a great job editing this film just right, as to add the most effective scares; it's great cinematography. This film is shot to do nothing to its audience but scare, disturb, and unnerve. In its release, it succeeded greatly. Today, it still does. This is truly an iconic horror film. I also appreciate how much awesome bonus material is added in this version, which makes it even better and more accurate. However, the book had a bit more feeling put into its ending as compared to the film. I cried at the end of the book, but the film just got my nerves up. They both come close as ever, but the book has a smidge more feeling in it.

OVERALL,an awesome horror film with a brilliantly-executed plot, top-notch performances, creepy score, realistic effects, most accuracy to the book, great editing, the effect to scare, and plenty of added bonuses, but the book has a bit of a stronger ending than the film.
½ July 6, 2009
To cap off the Halloween season this year, I review one of the scariest horror films there has ever been. This has stood the test of time with abounding horror, brilliant performances, and great effects for the time.

PLOT:Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) and her daughter, Regan (Linda Blair), are currently living in a big city while Chris is acting in a movie, shot by the drunken director, Burke Dennings (Jack MacGowran). While there, strange things start happening in the MacNeil household, for Regan claims her bed has been shaking and has been swearing heavily like she has never before. The doctors say its a problem with her temporal lobe, but things only go from bad to worse as they try to treat her. After seeing sights such as her daughter growling, levitating, and even changing voices, Chris becomes convinced that her daughter is possessed. She has a tough time find a priest to help, but she eventually stumbles across faith-stricken Father Karras (Jason Miller) and professional exorcist, Father Merrin (Max von Sydow), who has also been on expeditions to Africa for experience. These two must get the demon out of Regan or die trying. It's a great plot executed brilliantly.

ACTING:The performances in here are top-notch. Linda Blair has to be one of the best child actors of all-time for pulling off Regan MacNeil, a possessed child, at only about 9 years old. Jason Miller and Max von Sydow also played a couple great parts as the priests, Father Karras and Merrin; they played off of each other very well and worked intensely. The other shining stars would have been Ellyn Burstyn as distressed Chris MacNeil, Jack MacGowran as drunken Burke Dennings, Lee J. Cobb as Lt. Winderman, Mercedes McCambridge as the demon voice, and Eileen Dietz as the demon's face.

SCORE:The score is creepy and very memorable. The theme song, "Tubular Bells" by Mike Oldfield, has become one of the most memorable horror film themes in history. The rest of the score was pretty good too, and done in part by Jack Nitzche.

EFFECTS:The effects for this film's time were phenomenal, and they still are. The effects in here are super realistic, which makes them all the more scary. The blood, make-up, vomit, bed-shaking, head-turning, and illusioned effects were very great and made everything scary as ever.

OTHER CONTENT:This is one of the best horror films I've ever seen. Along with its previous rises, it doesn't stray too far from the book, has great editing, and is shot to scare. I've read the book before, and after seeing this, I notice only a slight change in dialogue and detail. Otherwise, all is down right. The director, William Friedkin, did a great job editing this film just right, as to add the most effective scares; it's great cinematography. This film is shot to do nothing to its audience but scare, disturb, and unnerve. In its release, it succeeded greatly. Today, it still does. This is truly an iconic horror film. I also appreciate how much awesome bonus material is added in this version, which makes it even better and more accurate. However, the book had a bit more feeling put into its ending as compared to the film. I cried at the end of the book, but the film just got my nerves up. They both come close as ever, but the book has a smidge more feeling in it.

OVERALL,an awesome horror film with a brilliantly-executed plot, top-notch performances, creepy score, realistic effects, most accuracy to the book, great editing, the effect to scare, and plenty of added bonuses, but the book has a bit of a stronger ending than the film.
November 1, 2012
The original movie, the best of all the series. This and emily rose hands down some of the best scary movies there is
October 27, 2012
Personally, I like the extended beginning and added footage.
October 2, 2012
This is one of the best horror films of all time
October 2, 2012
This is one of the best horror films of all time
Page 2 of 7