You are giving The Exorcist: Believer too much shit
Horror fans, I’m here to tell you that you've been overly critical of "The Exorcist: Believer." Directed by David Gordon Green, horror's new anointed king of the soft reboot, the film has garnered its fair share of criticism, being labelled as "not scary" and chastised for its conceited connection to the original. But is there more beneath the surface, and is it possible that we're being too harsh? Because let's be real, the reviews are scathing!
The movie kicks into second gear when two girls, Angela and her best friend Katherine, mysteriously vanish while exploring the woods. When the girls are eventually found, the traumatic experience has left them deeply scarred (understatement), and it becomes apparent that something sinister may have taken hold of them.
This unsettling incident sets the stage for a unique narrative that blends elements of Christian faith with the mysterious world of Voodoo and even incorporates scientific elements in confronting evil. This refreshing twist on the traditionally Catholic-centric exorcism narrative adds layers of intrigue to the story. However, this distinctive approach has left some viewers puzzled.
"Believer" has its strengths and weaknesses. The first half is a compelling exploration of faith, loss, and the supernatural, setting the stage for a promising narrative. However, as the story delves deeper into exorcism territory, it veers into more familiar, potentially less original, ground. Sadly, the closer the film gets to its roots, the faster it falls into absurdity. But these transgressions don’t completely destroy the story being told.
One of the huge hurdles this film was always going to face is its connection to the original "Exorcist." Attempts to pay homage make the film struggle under the weight of the franchise's legacy. Interestingly, it's worth noting that Ellen Burstyn had to be paid a substantial sum to appear in the film, which may have contributed to the audience's cynical opinion of the film. Critics arguing that "Believer" isn't terrifying enough may be viewing it through the lens of changing audience expectations. Modern horror has evolved, and today's viewers may demand different types of scares compared to the original "Exorcist." It's a reflection of the evolving horror genre.
Notably, David Gordon Green's previous work on "Halloween Ends" faced a similar backlash, showcasing how past missteps can unfairly colour perceptions of a filmmaker's current project. Sadly in Hollywood, when you are hot you can’t do anything wrong and the opposite can be said when you have just laid a crappy egg.
Reflecting on the franchise's history of production troubles, it's evident that each installment faced its share of challenges. From the original film's controversy to multiple sequels struggling to recapture the magic, the franchise has seen its ups and downs. "Believer" reminds us that in a world of repetitive reboots, a film that strives to break the mould is worth revisiting.
In summary, "The Exorcist: Believer" has its flaws but doesn't deserve the level of criticism it has received. It dares to be different, with a strong first half, a unique narrative, and moments that showcase its potential. So, here's the hot take: give it a second chance, separate it from the franchise's weight, and you might find a film that's more intriguing and original than you initially thought.
