Exorcist IV: The Beginning
United Kingdom
41853 people rated In 1947, having abandoned his faith, Father Merrin joins an archaeological excavation in Kenya, where an ancient church has been unearthed and something much older waits to be awoken.
Horror
Mystery
Thriller
Cast (18)
You May Also Like
User Reviews
user9755029206812
07/08/2024 06:48
Exorcist: The Beginning is a prequel to one of the best known horror films of the 20th Century. This time around Stellan Skaarsgard steps into the Father Merrin role that was originally played by another Swedish actor Max Von Sydow. Lancaster Merrin is a priest who lost his faith due to a horrific act that occurred during the war. He is now just simply an archaeologist investigating a strange discovery. In the African desert a church was uncovered. A 1,500 year old church that was so perfectly preserved that it appears to have been buried the moment it was finished. A sequence of events tests Merrin's limits as he uncovers the truth behind the evil at work. It covers the events referred to in the original film, Merrin's first exorcism and his meeting with Pazuzu.
I was skeptical at first due to the nasty problems that plagued the film (namely the original version was shot by Paul Schrader who was later tossed out by Warner and replaced by Renny Harlin, who dumped most of Schrader's version and re-shot a different script} and just the fact that it had hard shoes to film. But when I saw it in the theater I was pleasantly surprised to see a film with some excellent performances (Skaarsgard in particular) and several decent "boo" scenes and an overall satisfactory atmosphere and very strong sound effects track. A few minor quibbles aside, mostly due to CGI believability that don't detract too much from this decent scary movie.
Abdul Hameed
07/08/2024 06:48
You know, the very best film experiences are sometimes the ones that are the hardest work. If you don't work at this one, you'll be stuck at the John Carpenter level. But if you do...
Consider it this way. Some movies are made by fundamentalist Christians as part of their battle with the devil. These depict a battle with the devil, in fact the very same battle. Even though I'm an unbeliever, by my very act of watching, I become a weapon in that battle. Pretty terrifying if you think of it, especially if you believe in created realities (which you must when you watch movies).
It doesn't matter if these fundamentalist movies are bad, in fact it is better because you maintain your dual perspectives: in the movie and aware of watching it. And in any case, with Pat Robertson's billion dollar film school, these will get better. Indeed, many people thought Mel Gibson's film was competent.
Now to this movie. We have one film, the original "Exorcist." It is thirty years in our past and twenty-five years in the future of the main character. We know, but he doesn't. That's always in the background, that one layer of reality.
Then we have another film, the one Paul Schrader made using this same crew and sets. It is made from the perspective of the priest. It is cerebral, based on human needs and weaknesses. It is humanistly cinematic. We don't see that film, we only imagine it (which we can readily do since Schrader's imprint is heavy on Hollywood). Another reality.
And then we have the film the studio bosses remade. This one is made from the perspective of the devil. It is cinematic ally evil: lots of fetid maggots, implied Crowley-like perverted sex (only meekly implied), requisite Nazis, simpleminded natives (borderline in the racist stereotypes here), thickheaded Brits and scheming, lying priests. Each of these vie for control of the narrative.
So we have a struggle for narrative control within this one movie. We have the larger battle between the priest's movie (which we can only imagine) and the devil's movie (to which we give money and energy before it even starts). Us as a weapon in that battle as well.
I cannot image anything more horrifying. Doesn't matter if it is poorly done or not. This is real.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Kgaogelo monama
07/08/2024 06:48
There's no denying that this Exorcist prequel is surplus to requirements in terms of movies that needed to be made; but in spite of that, it's actually not bad at all. The film was never going to be received well, due to the fact that it's a prequel to one of the greatest horror movies ever made, and of course the whole Paul Schrader fiasco; but I'm happy to report that The Exorcist: The Beginning has risen from amidst the chaos and turned out to be a very decent horror movie. The action takes place before the events of the classic 70's movie, but it still follows the same character - Father Merrin, who was played by the great Max Von Sydow in the original, and is brought to life by Stellan Skarsgård in this movie. We follow him as he joins a British expedition in Kenya after an ancient church that has been buried underground for hundreds of years has been uncovered. You know what's coming, and this discovery is a springboard for all kinds of evil to be inflicted on the surrounding village.
The film really falls down on the character side, as we never really get to know any of them and with the possible slight exception of the lead; not a single one has any depth. That's unimportant, however, as this film's main focus is definitely the atmosphere; and it's suitably malevolent throughout, which does the film no end of favours. The action is very slow, especially for the first hour, but it hardly matters as watching the plot bathe in the atmosphere is always entertaining enough, and while it is slow you can always count on something to happen that will get the excitement levels back up. The film features several shocking and disturbing sequences, my personal favourite being the hyena attack; with the stillborn birth coming a close second. The CGI in the film leaves a lot to be desired, especially on the aforementioned hyena attack, but the effects aren't too much of an important element anyway. When the film boils down to it's ending is when it really lets rip, and the final fifteen minutes or so deliver some really great horror. While this film doesn't even nearly touch the original; it's much better than you would think considering all the turmoil surrounding the release and on the whole I give it a thumbs up!
Nana Lenea
07/08/2024 06:48
Ah, opening night at midnight. Any better time to see the movies? Especially horror movies. Maybe that's what got to me, because I am a little surprised by the rating of 4.7. I thought this had to be the best Exorcist sequel. The first is the best of course, then "the Beginning", then "The Herotic", and the third one come in place. That's just my opinion.
This movie scared the crap out of me. I was screaming and so was the other audience members. A group of teens walked out saying "This is too scary for me, man!". Of course it could of been a joke but I doubt it. There was more than a few screams and jumps. The ending gets to be more great than the beginning. So, give it a chance.
8/10
Barsha Raut
07/08/2024 06:48
It is a pity this movie is so underrated, but I think the main reason for that is the fact that people judge the movie before seeing it, so they won't watch it objectively. Another reason perhaps is the adventurous style of the film, but it is acceptable because father Merrin is younger than in the original film. The best actor to portray a young father Merrin is certainly the wonderful Stellan Skarsgård, what a stylish performance, this superb actor gives such a perfect image of how the main character would have been at the moment in his life when he lost his faith. The two other most important roles by Izabella Scorupco and James D'Arcy are excellent, the best supporting role is performed by Alan Ford. The madness and the confusion in the final battle between the Turkana and the Brithish are convincingly brought to screen. As for the crew members, I was very impressed by Trevor Rabin his soundtrack, the production design of Stefano Maria Ortolani and the magnificent cinematography by Vittorio Storaro. Conclusion: if you watch this film objectively than you will probably enjoy it. All though sometimes over the top, Renny Harlin has made a good prequel to the original one, with some very memorable scenes.
Aj’s lounge & Grills
07/08/2024 06:47
Exorcist: The Beginning starts in Cairo during 1949 as Father Lankester Merrin (Stellan Skarsgard) is approached by a man named Semelier (Ben Cross) who ask's Merrin to join a dig in Kenya in which a buried Church has been found that dates to 100's of years before Christianity ever reached the continent. Interested Merrin agrees, under the supervision of the British Army the Church is totally excavated, the native tribe the Turkana are afraid of the Church & warn of great evil. Once inside Merrin discovers that it was once used for evil sacrifice & that terrifying demonic forces have been unleashed, demonic forces that Merrin has to use his faith to conquer...
Originally set to be directed by John Frankenheimer who stepped down just before he died & then Paul Shrader was hired & finished the film, however Morgan Creek the production company fired him after not liking his version at all & hired Renny Harlin to turn in a much more audience friendly supernatural horror thriller with copious amounts of blood & gore which Shrader's version apparently lacked. About 10% of Shrader's original cut made it into this & I have never seen Shrader's version which has been released separately as Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist (2005) so I don't know how that turned out but I have to say I enjoyed Exorcist: The Beginning much, much more than I expected & I'd even go as far as to say it's a damned fine horror film in it's own right. The script by Alexi Hawley is actually a fairly engrossing & deep supernatural horror thriller that delivers some good shock's, gore & chill's. The story is surprisingly intelligent, don't get me wrong as you don't need a degree in rocket science to follow or understand it but as far as Hollywood horror films go there's a good story which works on several levels with good character's, good dialogue & a tight taught plot. It's obviously more expansive than the original & goes into the origins of the demonic force, it works very well on it's own & when viewed as part of the Exorcist series which lets face it is hit & miss anyway. A really good film, better than I expected & the executives at Morgan Creek made the right call giving both Shrader's & his boring version the boot.
Director Harlin does a good job & the film looks very slick & has plenty of atmosphere. The film looks great with nice locations, great sets with the old Church in particular looking good & the CGI computer effects are also very good. There's some really good gore here as well, from bones sticking out of people's skin, horribly mutilated bodies strung up with birds pecking it's eye out, people shooting themselves through the head, a gory battle sequence, slashed throats, a still-born baby covered in maggots & more. There's a nice creepy feel to the film as well, there is a definite supernatural feel to it & a cool ending as Merrin comes up against the demon who has possessed someone.
According to the IMDb Harlin's version cost around $50,000,000 & it certainly looks impressive, it's well made with good scope & scale. Shot on location in Morocco & in Italy. There's a good cast here & the acting is good from all involved so I have no complaints on that front. Alan Ford perhaps better known as Brick Top from the brilliant Snatch (2000) puts in a good shift.
Exorcist: The Beginning is a much better film than I expected & for me it has become one of the better big budget Hollywood horror flicks of the past few years as far as I'm concerned. I really liked it which pleasantly surprised me considering it's production problems. This is a prequel to The Exorcist (1973) which was followed by the dire Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977) & the distinctly average The Exorcist III (1990).
TIKTOK_IGP👮🏽
07/08/2024 06:47
In this prequel to the classic horror 'The Exorcist' we meet Father Merrin during a phase of his life where he has lost his faith. Stellan Skarsgard plays this role excellently and is easy to relate to the character we know from the original film, when he joins a British excavation in Kenya where a Christian church has been unearthed. Beneath the church lies the dormant horror that Father Merrin seems destined to meet.
The direction is stylish, the cast are very strong, especially Skarguard, D'Arcy and Scorupco; and the film delivers background story and horror far more convincingly than i ever believed it would.
7/10
Elvira Lse
07/08/2024 06:47
I just completed watching both versions, and I must say that Beginning by far out weighs Dominion. I can understand where Dominion was trying to go, and not very far without funding. Harlin's version offers a much more believable character in Merrin with the flash backs and use of photography.
I believe that the characters presented by Schrader are far more simple and naive, lacking depth and intenseness into their roles. The only people that have fear of the church are the (Tikati), whereas in Hanlin's at least the young priest has knowledge and some fear of the powers in play.
Schrader's version does do a better job extending the description of the ritual execution of the British soldiers in the church, however the church itself lacks the presence and ambiance of holiness.
Schrader's Satan is to Buddhist looking and the use of the red-eyes is lame at best.
Harlin's use of the lady doctor and her husband are absolutely perfect and highly unexpected. Excellent job.
While I can't consider the Beginning to be a true prequel to the original, it's story is by far easier to fall into than Schrader's.
Choosing between Beginning v. Dominion is easy...
Dominion = Concept to be sold to the studio Executives as in a pilot
Beginning = Final Cut and masterfully acted.
Fredson Luvicu
07/08/2024 06:47
I had at least expected EXORCIST - THE BEGINNING to be somewhat faithful to the original movie. The CGI-created camera swoop over the opening massacre dashed that hope. The gritty realism of THE EXORCIST is absent here. What we have is yet another special effects-laden spectacle along the lines of THE MUMMY, much darker, but no less stupid.
Renny Harlin proves once again he was born to direct beer commercials. He seems to have no concept of camera movement, editing, timing, pacing or much of anything. It's like giving a first year film student $50 million and saying "make this into a movie." He tries to impress, and fails. His camera moves for no reason, he cuts to close-ups at inappropriate moments, ends scenes prematurely, and guides the actors to deliver more bad performances then any one movie should have to bear.
There is one genuinely unsettling moment, when a mother gives birth to a rotten fetus covered in maggots, but pretty much all the other "scares" and attempts at tension or suspense fall flat. There are the usual cheap shots, such as loud bursts of music and slamming doors, and some second rate CGI sequences that look like rejected effects from THE HULK. Kind of hard to be horrified by the sight of a little boy being ripped to pieces by hyenas when the scene looks like it belongs in a video game.
The screenplay is needlessly convoluted, perhaps to cover up the fact that the writer can't write dialog to save his life. Throw in a few battle scenes and a sand storm and maybe no one will notice how much the story sucks. Characters are introduced into the story for next to no reason. The female doctor serves little purpose other than to look pretty and take a three second long shower. She does play an "important" role in the finale, but only through a ridiculous and pointless contrivance which reeks of hack work. The British officer who sends Merrin on his quest in the beginning shows up again so he can kill himself after his butterfly collection comes to life. Oooooo, scary.
EXORCIST - THE BEGINNING makes EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC seem not so bad. I am not sure where the writers of this drivel got the idea that the character of Father Merrin ever lost his faith. It is repeatedly referenced in THE EXORCIST book and the movie EXORCIST II that Merrin exorcised a Syrian demon named Pazuzu from an African boy while he was working as a missionary in Africa; yet here, Merrin is an atheist and they seem to fighting Lucifer himself. I thought this was supposed to be an actual prequel to THE EXORCIST, but it seems more like an episode of THE ADVENTURES OF YOUNG FATHER MERRIN. This story was covered better and more intelligently in EXORCIST II, as flawed a movie as it may be.
This is definitely one to skip. I didn't have to worry about ruining the ending for you because I didn't make it that far. I don't remember the last time I gave up on a movie. This is one for the record.
EXORCIST - THE BEGINNING is the pits.
K33Etq
27/12/2023 20:38
🥇🥇🥇🥇🥇