In the annals of film history, Exorcist II: The Heretic stands as a monument to misguided ambition. David Kittredge's new book, Boorman and the Devil, offers a thoroughly enjoyable re-evaluation of this 1977 catastrophe. The sequel to William Friedkin's horror masterpiece was widely derided, yet it brims with unintentional comedy and visual boldness. This review explores Kittredge's detailed account of how John Boorman's film became a legendary flop and why it remains fascinating.
The Vision and the Disaster
John Boorman, coming off the success of Deliverance, was offered the original Exorcist but turned it down, disliking the story. He was later induced to take on the sequel, which promised a more ambitious, metaphysical exploration. The result was a bizarre fantasy rhapsody that baffled audiences. Linda Blair and Max von Sydow returned, joined by Richard Burton as a troubled priest and Louise Fletcher as a psychiatrist with a ridiculous "mind-reader" contraption. The film was visually bold, pioneering in its use of Steadicam, but its narrative was incoherent.
Audience Reactions and Legacy
According to an apocryphal tale repeated by Friedkin, one night an enraged audience turned around and booed Warner Brothers executives in the back row, then chased them out of the building and down the street. At the first film, people screamed in terror; now they screamed with laughter. Boorman desperately recut the film, removing the sillier bits, but the damage was done. The film became a cult classic for all the wrong reasons.
Kittredge's Re-evaluation
David Kittredge's book provides a detailed, sympathetic account of Boorman's painful experience. Boorman himself is interviewed and generously discusses his mortifying ordeal. Kittredge argues that despite its flaws, the film has moments of brilliance and is ripe for re-evaluation. The book delves into the production challenges, the studio interference, and the creative missteps that led to the disaster.
Comparison: Original vs. Sequel
| Aspect | The Exorcist (1973) | Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977) |
|---|---|---|
| Director | William Friedkin | John Boorman |
| Audience Reaction | Terror, screams | Laughter, booing |
| Critical Reception | Acclaimed | Derided |
| Visual Style | Gritty realism | Bold, surreal |
| Legacy | Horror classic | Cult disaster |
Key Takeaways from the Book
- Boorman originally turned down The Exorcist but was persuaded to direct the sequel.
- The film's use of Steadicam was innovative but overshadowed by its flaws.
- Audience reactions shifted from terror to ridicule, damaging the franchise.
- Kittredge's book offers a balanced, entertaining look at a legendary flop.
FAQ
What is Exorcist II: The Heretic about?
What is Exorcist II: The Heretic about?
The film follows Father Lamont (Richard Burton) as he investigates the death of Father Merrin and attempts to exorcise the demon from Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair), leading to a surreal journey into the nature of good and evil.
Why was Exorcist II so poorly received?
Why was Exorcist II so poorly received?
The film's incoherent plot, ridiculous elements like the mind-reader machine, and tonal shifts from horror to unintentional comedy alienated both critics and audiences.
Is Boorman and the Devil worth reading?
Is Boorman and the Devil worth reading?
Yes, David Kittredge's book is a thoroughly enjoyable and detailed account that sheds new light on the making of the film and its cultural impact, making it a must-read for film buffs.