Review: 'The Exorcist: Believer'
Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 12:00PM 
The legacy of William Friedkin’s screen adaptation of The Exorcist is a complicated one. Like any long-running horror franchise, the history of its lore is long and maybe a bit confusing. 50 years after the original, we have a sixth film entry (although two of those are duelling prequels built from production turmoil) from director David Gordon Green who works once again on the screenplay with his Halloween reboot buddy Danny McBride (alongside Scott Teems and Peter Sattler). It unfortunately adds little to the myth...
The Exorcist franchise is at its best when it is building itself up through character and surprising the audience with complex narrative choices. This is something that Green initially appears to succeed at working to. His film, the first in a supposed trilogy, begins with a single father (Leslie Odom Jr.) and his daughter (Lidya Jewett). She misses her mother, and with a friend (Olivia Marcum), they set about trying to speak to the other side. Much like The Exorcist III, its titular ceremony appears far from its mind as the story soon slinks into a mystery about a missing child and the complicated ramifications of that. It’s involving and well-paced even if some of the writing around Odom Jr. was too saintly for me. Ann Dowd is also there.
But it is as if in an instant that Green remembered he was making an Exorcist movie at which point he—pardon the language—shits the bed. For Green and McBride, an Exorcist movie in 2023 is little more than a run of the mill possessed teenage girl movie with CGI goo and few fresh ideas.
When Ellen Burstyn re-appears for the first time in the franchise’s history for what amounts to not much but an extended cameo, it was as if I could see Believer’s potential evaporating right before my very eyes. By the time the two girls are strapped into chairs with zealots hurling bible incantations at them, the movie had become a roll-call of possession and exorcism movie tropes that ceased to be properly effective many years ago. At least The Pope's Exorcist had Russell Crowe in Orson Welles drag riding around the countryside on a vespa.
To be perfectly honest, it’s almost offensive how little Green appears to care about actually saying anything. The Exorcist franchise has been around for fifty years, yet this is nearabout the weakest in terms of any genuine complex thoughts about the Catholic Church, religion and faith. Earlier this year, a small Australian indie horror called Godless: The Eastfield Exorcism was released that, for all of its faults, at least had something to say about how societies can too easily succumb to the whims of radicals (it’s on Tubi if you wish to try that one on at home this Halloween instead). This has no such concept of thought. But it does have voodoo.
At its best, the Exorcist movies are made by adults and for grown ups, with all of the critical thinking and emotional connections that comes with life’s experiences. They offer characters complex emotions with which to navigate, often fighting internal wars of the mind and soul as much as they are the wars of demonic possession. The Exorcist is a movie that confronted audiences in unimaginable ways. Nothing is as easy as simply turning on a switch and say “I believe!”. The Exorcist: Believer on the other hand is frustratingly uninquisitive about religion—which, given the shifting attitudes around it and our knowledge of the Catholic Church’s own sins these days feels like a dereliction of duty. In fact, it appears to even be pro-church.
It’s sad to see Believer turn it into anonymous fodder for kids. Content for teenagers who maybe know of the “Exorcist” brand but are allergic to old movies. Just as it is impossible to imagine anybody who did (and still does) find Friedkin’s 1973 classic so effective finding anything here to raise even a modest pulse, so too is it hard to fathom younger audiences being inspired to visit the original. There’s little here that hasn’t already been seen in a dozen other movies. And in many places, done better. If this had simply been titled Believer, I’d have probably had no idea this was even meant to be the same world. I might have also been more charitable. Which, for a film trying to launch a $400mil (!!) franchise, isn’t great.
Ellen Burstyn, Leslie Odom Jr, The Exorcist
Reader Comments (5)
What did people expect from the guy who gifted us with the new Halloween trilogy,the third of which must be one of the worst films of all time and how to alienate your audience,seems like he's repeated the same here,hopefully people won't see it and we don't have to sit through anymore sequels.
Remember when David Gordon Green used to make these amazing indie films in the 2000s that was championed by Roger Ebert with a lot of comparisons to Terrence Malick? What happened to that guy? While I enjoyed Pineapple Express, everything after that becomes spotty. For gems such as Joe and Stronger, there was also The Sitter and Your Highness. I don't know if I want to see this as I believe that if I do, I would dishonor the memory of William Friedkin.
MrRipley, I will admit that I didn't actually know he directed it until his name appeared in the end credits.
I will admit, seeing the trailer in theaters, hearing the music and then seeing Chris was pretty exciting. Sad to hear that Burstyn only has a cameo.
I'm not surprised that this film isn't very good. At this point, studios know that they can release horror films, of any quality, and they'll be fairly profitable no matter what.
Joe G.-- Honestly, same. Not sure I have any excitement for this if she's only a cameo.
Still, knowing Ellen Burstyn got the studio to create a scholarship program as payment for her reluctant participation in this, makes me smile. Good for her!