jacobjohntaylor1 Don't get me wrong. The first 3 Exorcist movies are very scary. But this prequel is scarier. Dominion a prequel to the exorcist is scarier. But still this is a very scary movie. This is one of the scariest movies mad before 2005. See this movie. It is a great movie. It has great acting. It also has a great story line. It also has great special effects. All the exorcist movies are must sees. They are some of the best horror movies ever made. An old church is dug up in Africa. No one knows it's origins. And archaeologist who is a former priest is sent there. It turns out there was a demon buried with the church. Now that he as been woken up he has possessed some one. Very scary. See it.

Scott LeBrun This prequel to the classic terror tale of "The Exorcist" was directed from scratch by Renny Harlin; originally Paul Schrader had done a version (which is its own separate film) that was scrapped by the studio. It shows us the earlier days of the tormented Lancaster Merrin (Stellan Skarsgard). Haunted by something that he was forced to do during WWII, he now works as an archaeologist. He's hired to work on a dig in East Africa, where a church has been found buried under the sand. This place, of course, is shrouded in evil. A child is harmed, workmen go mad, and there are special effects galore.This could and should have been a more powerful story about one mans' rediscovery of his faith. Unfortunately, it just doesn't have that much impact. There's spooky atmosphere to spare; the filmmaking is at least commendable on a technical level, with very stylish lighting by Vittorio Storaro. The story is treated with the utmost seriousness, with very little in the way of humour. There are passable shocks, but nothing that's all that eerie, and certainly nothing that's really memorable. The CGI is pretty damn unconvincing at times. After a while, it all starts to feel pretty familiar, not just to followers of this franchise, but to followers of religious horror in general. We never get to really know most of the characters - only Father Merrin is fleshed out to any substantial degree.Thankfully, Merrin is a compelling character, and Skarsgard is extremely well cast. He and his supporting actors do their able best with what they've got. Izabella Scorupco plays a dedicated doctor, James D'Arcy the helpful Father Francis. Alan Ford chews up the scenery as Jefferies. Child actor Remy Sweeney is appealing as the imperiled Joseph.Naturally this effort is going to fall short when compared to the iconic 1973 original, but it isn't altogether bad, and one could certainly do much worse than this.Six out of 10.

Bonehead-XL Making a prequel to "The Exorcist" is an interesting idea. Though briefly touched upon in "Exorcist II: The Heretic," a movie most would ignore anyway, the full details of Father Merrin's first encounter with the demon all that time ago in African had never been elaborated upon. Prequels were still hot business in 2005, as well, before that cycle turned to the current reboot cycle where in now. Of course now, we all know what a massive mess the production of "Exorcist: The Beginning" was. The original director died before production started, the version shot by Paul Schrader was discarded by Morgan Creek for being too noncommercial and too bloodless, and Renny Harlin was brought in to shoot an entirely different movie. Neither version was critically or financially successful, making the whole ordeal look like a totally wasted endeavor. Of the two, "The Beginning" has always been considered the worst, which is why I've avoided it until now.After witnessing Nazi atrocities in World War II, Father Merrin lost his faith and abandoned the cloth. Instead, he turns to archeology as a career. He is sent to Africa to find further information about a casting of a Sumerian demon. There, he discovers an ancient Christian church, buried underground and left in perfect condition. The church is full of blasphemous desecration. Soon, strange events begin to happen in the village around the church. A boy acts strangely, seemingly under the sway of something. Tension rises between the African natives and the British army, leading to war. Merrin soon realizes the devil is responsible and must regain his faith to fight back the demon.There's many things I dislike about "Exoricst: The Beginning" but I'll start with the nonsensical plot. The movie breaks continuity with "Exoricst II: The Heretic" wildly, which is not surprising. However, that the movie dispenses entirely with established lore is frustrating. Kokumo is not mentioned and Merrin does not perform an exorcism on a little boy. The plot revolving around the abandoned church goes wildly awry. It is revealed that a massacre occurred in this spot years ago and that the Catholic Church believes this to be the spot where Satan fell from heaven. As a result of this, everyone around the church goes violently insane. Eventually, the English soldiers and the native Africans get into a bloody battle together as a result of this, with plenty of suicides. None of this has much to do with the mythology of "The Exorcist." The plot is mostly a collection of unrelated gory sequence, the faithless Father Merrin and the boy he believes to be possessed wandering around the edges of the story."Exorcist: The Beginning" is also an awful horror movie. The movie indulges in all the worst excesses of modern studio horror. The film is packed full of obnoxious jump scares, loud noises or musical stings or sudden appearances screaming at the audience all the time. Morgan Creek reportedly refilmed the movie because they wanted more gore in it. Director Renny Harlin, he of "Die Hard 2" fame, gave them just that. The movie is loaded with sickening violence. A psychic force breaks men's fingers and arms, the bone stabbing through the flesh. A body is found with a huge chunk of meat taken out of the middle. Another dangles from his entrails. The movie is loaded with CGI head shots. I can't even enjoy this stuff from the perspective of a gorehound, partially because of the crappy CGI but mostly because the violence so nihilistic and thoughtless in its use. Speaking of crappy special effects, what about those CGI hyenas? Who thought that was a good idea? In its last half-hour, "Exorcist: The Beginning" remembers that it's a prequel to "The Exorcist." In a cheap plot twist, the character we've been led to believe is possessed is not. Instead, a character that has shown no previous symptoms is revealed to be possessed. Set inside the abandoned church, what follows is a melodramatic battle between Merrin and the demon. The possessed person gains the same sickly skin, scars, and voice as Linda Blair did back in 1973. Using modern special effects, the possessed bends their body at painful angles, screams limp profanity, and slithers around on the wall. Merrin regains his faith spontaneously, his character arc coming to a blunt resolution. Because this movie was made by idiots, Merrin exerting the power of God over the demon is shown literally by waves of "power" blasting and twisting the demon's body.Despite being an otherwise terrible movie, "Exorcist: The Beginning" does have a pretty good cast. One of the few reoccurring faces between both versions is Stellen Skarsgaard as Merrin. The flashbacks to the war, the event that made the priest loose his faith, are melodramatically presented and cut into the present story in inelegant ways. Skarsgaard does his best though, doing professional work with the material he's given. I also like Izabella Scorupco, who has chemistry with Skarsgaard. The conversations between the two actors, and the slow way her history is revealed, are the only times the movie begins to feel like a real film."The Exorcist" was a horror film for adults, struggling with serious and complex issues. "Exorcist: The Beginning" is a horror film for stupid teenagers, full of senseless gore and a thoughtless story. It's so dumb that it actually ends with a sequel hook, Merrin now dressed as a priest and walking off like a superhero. That one of the best horror films of all time is associated with this massive piece of tripe is an insult to every living creature on the planet.

SnoopyStyle In 1949, the British army has stumbled onto a buried Byzantium church in Kenya. The church's date is too early and shouldn't exist. Merrin (Stellan Skarsgård) is a former priest who suffered a traumatic war experience. He's called in to help with the archaeological dig. Father Francis (James D'Arcy) is sent in by the Vatican, and Sarah (Izabella Scorupco) is also trying to escape the horrors of WWII.This is simply not a scary movie. That's the biggest and really the only measuring stick for a horror movie. At almost 2 hours, it's way too long. The pace is way too slow. The look of the production seems smaller than what the budget would indicate.The feel of the movie hearkens back to the 70s, and not in good way. Horror movies have moved on, but this one still believes that flies are scary. The CGI is not the best. The blood and guts are acceptable. The baby with maggots looks creepy. But other times, the movie holds back too much. The coyote attack should have been scary, but it's never given a chance. It's just not good enough for today's audience.