The franchise that followed the original The Exorcist was always an unusual one. The second film was critically panned upon release and hasn’t fared much better in the intervening years. The third entry was more effective and frightening, but it was only tangentially related to the original film. One of the most interesting entries of the series, a spin-off film called The Ninth Configuration, which followed a minor character from the original, isn’t usually even considered a genuine part of the series.
And then, of course, there is the prequel. Or, more appropriately, the prequels. How did they come about, what went wrong, why are there two of them, and which is ultimately the superior film?
Let’s take a look at Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist and Exorcist: The Beginning.
William Wisher Jr., co-writer of the first two Terminator films, was originally asked to come up with a new story for the Exorcist franchise; his reaction to that request, in the interview book The Anatomy of Fear: Conversations with Cult Horror and Science Fiction Filmmakers (written by Kathleen Fernandez-Vander Kaay and myself), was to say, “Not only do I NOT want to do that, I don’t think the world needs another one of those.”
He changed his mind, however, after a small mention from the first film popped into his head. Describing a plot point about The Exorcist, Wisher said, “In the original book and 1973 film, the Church calls Merrin because he’s the only guy they can find who has previously performed one of those things. And I went, ‘that’s the story’; it’s 1946 in Africa, he’s just come out from the Second World War, and like fifty million people died – it’s easy to set up that he’s lost his faith in God, and he goes to this village because he’s running away. And he meets this poor child, and in helping him, and fighting the devil, and facing his own demons, he gets his faith back.”
Armed with that idea, he wrote the script, and a seemingly brilliant package was formed when writer/director Paul Schrader signed on to direct the film. A smart writer creating back story based on elements from the original film, all brought to the screen by an iconic director. What could go wrong?
“That was the weirdest project I have ever been involved with in my life, and it’s a heart breaker,” Wisher said, referring to the very strange and oddly public trouble the film went through. That trouble started when James Robinson, owner of Morgan Creek (the studio that financed the film), saw the cut of Paul Schrader’s film Dominion and said outright that he wasn’t going to release it. However, because the intellectual property was valuable, they weren’t just going to shelve the movie. So the company made other plans.
“They made two movies out of that movie,” Wisher said, “and Paul Schrader directed the movie that I wrote, shot it, edited it. Finished it. But that movie got shelved and Renny Harlin was hired. Jim Robinson didn’t like Schrader’s movie of my script, he said it wasn’t enough of a horror film.”
Thus began the production of the second film, helmed by Harlin, with a new script by Alexi Hawley that strangely contained nearly every single beat and plot point of the Schrader and Wisher version. Wisher described watching the new version as “one of the oddest experiences in my life. Like they had taken the script, broken it into 3×5 cards, threw them in the air, mixed them with a bunch of new cards from some other writer, then stuck them back together in random order and shot that.”
When Harlin’s film was completed and released as Exorcist: The Beginning, it did not find favor with audiences or critics. It was dismissed as a bundle of half-hearted jump scares and awkward action sequences strung together with passing nods to the original film in the series but little else to distinguish itself. Mainstream audiences weren’t interested in seeing it, and horror aficionados were insulted by its lack of ambition. It made its budget back but barely broke even after advertising, and the film currently has an 11% freshness rating at Rotten Tomatoes.
The production company saw that perhaps there was a silver lining to the problematic public issues the film suffered from; the moviegoing public already knew there was another, fully completed version of the film, so why not release that one as well? Dominion finally saw the light of day as a DVD release, and possibly for the first time in history, two distinct versions of the same story made around the same time, produced by the same company but from different filmmakers, were both commercially available.
Dominion was by no means a huge success, either. Even ignoring the fact that it premiered on DVD and therefore would not make as much money, the film itself suffered from pacing issues, questionable special effects, and an overall feeling of a lack of investment in the subject matter. Though the spiritual and psychological aspects were more pronounced in the Schrader version, the filmmaking itself left something to be desired.
So which film is the superior film? “I prefer the quiet, emotionally disturbing nature of the first one we made, over the overt horror story they finally released,” said Wisher, perhaps unsurprisingly. He did note something interesting, however, regarding his struggles with James Robinson about the nature of the film itself: “I kept telling him The Exorcist wasn’t a horror film. It was a disturbing film. It’s a slow, cold, creepy, terrifying thing, but it’s ultimately about faith and God.”
Neither of the films were particularly well-received, so it wasn’t as if audiences flocked to the Schrader version as the superior movie upon its DVD release. Perhaps the reason for the financial failure of both prequels can be addressed by the absence of what made the 1973 film such a success.
Paul Schrader has always been a smart and engaged writer and director, and his Calvinist religious upbringing led to him creating some excellent filmic observations of the struggle of faith, from the script for The Last Temptation of Christ to Touch. Almost all his films deal in some way with man’s struggle against his own base desires, and his scripts for Taxi Driver and Raging Bull were made into epic classic films. He has not, however, always had a flare for visual storytelling, often directing films with a cool distance and stillness.
Renny Harlin, on the other hand, has a visual flourish that nearly always comes through, no matter the subject matter or budget. From A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master to Die Hard 2 to The Long Kiss Goodnight, Harlin has delivered films whose imagery and fluid movement are always impressive. He has not, however, had to tackle something as heady, reverent, and emotionally devastating as The Exorcist, and that isn’t exactly his forte. Both versions of the prequel to The Exorcist were lacking in aspects because each was missing the half that the other was better at; that is why the original film will always be remembered and revered.
William Peter Blatty, the writer of the book and the original film, was the smart, passionate man of faith that brought the story to vivid emotional life. William Friedkin, the director of the original, was one of the most skilled and daring visual storytellers of his day, a risk-taker who formed a surprising but strong bond with Blatty to create one of the most iconic works in film history. If nothing else, the dueling versions of the Exorcist prequel, and their lack of connection to a wide audience, remind us how difficult it is to find a pairing like the original’s.
