It’s an excellent month for an exorcism. From Oct. 21-31, I’m looking back at the five films of “The Exorcist” series as we celebrate Spooky Month here at Reviews from My Couch. Next up is the second film, “Exorcist II: The Heretic” (1977):
A precipitous drop
“Exorcist II: The Heretic” is a strong candidate for the sequel that has the most precipitous drop from the original. All the moody slow-build tension of 1973’s “The Exorcist” is gone as we catch up with Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair), now a teenager and still with a shred of the demon Pazuzu inside her.
The slow pacing is still present, but it doesn’t play well under the pen of William Goodhart and the direction of John Boorman and the uncredited Rospo Pallenberg.
This sequel has a flawed concept, and the narrative makes little sense in the end. (Reportedly, Goodhart’s screenplay was rewritten by Boorman and Pallenberg during shooting.)
I have a nagging sense that the filmmakers were going for some sort of metaphor or subtext, and that the critically dismissed “Exorcist II” would be a good candidate for revisiting and re-examining. But it’s so darn boring that it’s hard to stay awake while thinking about the movie, let alone watching it.
Now living in New York, Regan makes regular visits to Dr. Gene Tuskin (Louise Fletcher), an experiment-driven psychiatrist, on the orders of her off-screen mother Chris (Ellen Burstyn does not return).
Why go to these sessions?
Chris and Regan know Regan was possessed by Pazuzu and that Father Merrin (Max von Sydow, returning for flashbacks to a previous exorcism) died performing the successful exorcism. I don’t know why Chris wants Regan in these sessions.
The bungling of Gene, with her prototype hypnotic synchronizer (basically, lights and sounds), brings Pazuzu closer to the surface in Regan, which is disastrous. But since this disaster has happened, the machine’s existence is good because Regan and Father Lamont (a dazed Richard Burton) can now link up to fight the demon.
This linkage allows us to connect the new threat of Pazuzu to Regan, to whom we have goodwill (whereas Lamont is a total blank). Regan is just a kid being thrown into this mess by hapless adults.
And indeed, the most redeeming value of “Exorcist II” might be accidental: We get a sense that Chris, always away on acting gigs, isn’t there for her daughter. The “Exorcist” TV series (2016-18) would play up this lingering issue between mother and daughter.
In the climax back at the old Georgetown house, Pazuzu appears in the form of Regan. But he doesn’t possess Regan or anybody else in order to gain corporeal form (Regan herself is also in the sequence). I wonder if this was supposed to take place on an ethereal plane of reality, and the directors were unable to communicate this.
Who is the heretic?
Another dumb thing is that the movie is called “The Heretic,” but who is the heretic? Lamont correctly believes in demonic possession, so he’s not a heretic.
Gene doesn’t believe in it, but she’s not religious, and therefore also not a heretic. (The web tells me the title refers to Merrin, whom the church theorizes might’ve been a Satanist in his final moments – despite having no reason to think this.)
“Exorcist II” has hints of being expensive, with a grand Middle East village (actually shot in the American Southwest) accessible by climbing up a chimney between two rock pillars, lots of locust-eye-view shots in dream sequences, and Gene’s futuristic laboratory.
In that lab, she’s studying and hoping to cure psychological conditions in children and teens. In the film’s best scene by default, Regan makes small talk with an autistic girl, who responds, talking for the first time. Regan apparently has a special ability, and Blair’s sweetness is allowed to come through in this scene.
(This movie doesn’t give Blair enough to do, but it is smart to show her a lot, even if she’s playing hypnotized or drugged. She has a movie-star quality, even though she wasn’t able to cash in on it.)
This scene also boasts the film’s only moment of humor: “What’s the matter with you?” “I was possessed by a demon.”
A long way down
Just as that one funny line is perhaps accidental, the one scary element is also accidental. The MacNeils’ rooftop patio atop a New York skyscraper has terrifyingly huge gaps in its wall. It’s remarkable that that’s allowed under the building code or that a resident would want gaps like that. Still, it is a striking location.
The boring scenes overtake the decent set designs and locations, and the movie feels cheap. Scenes of Regan and Lamont being hypnotized with the synchronizer seem endless. They are narratively forgettable yet so long and boring that you can’t shake them off.
“Exorcist II: The Heretic” plays like two hours of deleted scenes; a clear creative vision fails to coalesce. Goodhart’s original screenplay reportedly underscores the mildly interesting “good attracts evil” theme, but it’s buried in the final cut; Regan’s moment with the autistic girl becomes an exception rather than the rule.
Maybe the directors had their own ideas about this movie’s point. But whatever those may have been, they don’t get communicated to the viewer.
Schedule of “Exorcist” reviews:
Wednesday, Oct. 21: “The Exorcist” (1973)
Friday, Oct. 23: “Exorcist II: The Heretic” (1977)
Wednesday, Oct. 28: “The Exorcist III” (1990)
Friday, Oct. 30: “Exorcist: The Beginning” (2004)
Saturday, Oct. 31: “Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist” (2005)