The good news is that the movie is better than the two sequels to The Exorcist. The bad news is that it still doesn't come anywhere near the quality of the original movie.
This is actually a prequel, going back to 1949 in Kenya to watch Father Merrin's first go around with the devil. It's a story idea so great, they decided to film it twice. This production has added new meaning to the word troubled. Originally John Frankenheimer was to direct it but he was unable to do so on account of being dead. Then they called in Paul Schrader (writer of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull) to write and direct. He shot the film and was promptly fired for not giving producer James G. Robinson what he wanted. In came Renny Harlin (Deep Blue Sea, Driven) to tackle the project. He reshot around 90% of the film from a new script, dropping two characters along the way. Gabriel Mann was unavailable for the reshoot and was replaced. Accidents were a major concern as well. Liam Neeson was originally cast to play Merrin but was hurt in an accident and withdrew. Then Harlin himself was seriously hurt in a crash. A superstitious person might think the project was cursed. A smart one would conclude it was just a bad idea.
The film actually gets off to a good start with an unsettling introduction set hundreds of years in the past. Then we jump forward to meet a young Father Merrin (Stellan Skarsgard), who has left the priesthood to be an archeologist. He has lost his faith after a horrible encounter with Nazi cruelty during World War II. He is hired to join the excavation of a 5th century Catholic church in Kenya by a mysterious dealer. When Merrin gets there he finds the lead archeologist has gone bonkers, the foreman has the world's worst acne and the doctor is impossibly hot.
There is probably a good movie here somewhere, investigating the past of Merrin, his loss of faith and an encounter with the devil. Unfortunately this movie doesn't have the patience to really get into the development of Merrin enough. Stellan Skarsgard does good work with the part but the script is in too much of a hurry to get to the obligatory jump scares and blood spurting to appreciate what he's doing. There are some nice bits that show us the horrors in his past and a budding romance with Dr. Sarah (Izabella Scorupco). But awkward editing and the need to jam in some jolts obscure all this. Oddly, for a film where not much seems to happen for long periods of time, it's in an awful hurry to move along. Some of the plot is a bit ridiculous, like a Church cover-up and Merrin's tendency to do things in the middle of the night like he's a vampire archeologist. It seems that in the rush to make a second version of the movie, a lot of things simply weren't thought through.
The look of the film is simply gorgeous. Vittorio Storaro's cinematography is beautiful and very atmospheric. Stefano Ortolani's production design is top notch and complements the photography. The digital effects on the other hand range from acceptable down to pitiful. If they hadn't shot this movie twice they would probably have had sufficient budget to get some good effects.
This is the sort of film you're better off renting. It has enough good stuff to not make it painful to watch but there isn't much to recommend a trip to the theater. It has a few scares but is mostly dull right up until the end when things just get silly. Maybe they'll shoot the movie a third time and try to actually get it right this time.
- John Shea
Related Items:
|
