Suite du film de 1973 sur une fille de 12 ans qui est possédée par une mystérieuse entité démoniaque, forçant sa mère à demander l'aide de deux prêtres pour la sauver.Suite du film de 1973 sur une fille de 12 ans qui est possédée par une mystérieuse entité démoniaque, forçant sa mère à demander l'aide de deux prêtres pour la sauver.Suite du film de 1973 sur une fille de 12 ans qui est possédée par une mystérieuse entité démoniaque, forçant sa mère à demander l'aide de deux prêtres pour la sauver.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 22 nominations au total
Marie Michelle Bazile
- Craftsperson
- (as Marie Michele Bazile)
Résumé
Reviewers say 'The Exorcist Believer' is a divisive sequel with mixed reactions. Praise is given for atmospheric execution, strong performances, and special effects. Criticisms include failure to match the original's impact, weak scares, predictable plot, and pacing issues. Ellen Burstyn's inclusion is seen as underutilized. Some appreciate religious themes and character development, while others find it formulaic and lacking genuine horror. Overall, it is an average addition to the franchise, struggling to live up to the original's legacy.
Avis à la une
"The Exorcist: Believer" is a film whose trailer was better and which promised an old school style story but adding new elements, the result was not terrible but it was bad. The script starts without much interest, the scenes of the first symptoms of demonic possession were quite simple and did not create tension, the exorcism scenes fail to stand out and feel illogical, during this part of the film it manages to have a couple of good scenes. Using characters from the original film makes no sense, their participation is almost irrelevant but it is nice to see them again. Within the aforementioned script, an attempt was made to give it a new perspective with the theme of religions and a union with a common good, but it completely fails to innovate and they treat it in a simple way. The performances are average, the two possessed girls do not achieve the masterful performance that Linda Blair achieved in 1973. David Gordon Green fails miserably in his work as a director, the cinematography is decent, on the soundtrack it is appreciated to hear the legendary "Tubular Bells" although with certain changes that are not poorly achieved and the makeup effects look gloomy. The positive points are few and the negative ones are more, a soulless sequel.
I think we were all fooled by Halloween 2018 and thought David Gordon Green was going to be somewhat of a saviour for horror... we were wrong. Instead of making these below average horror sequels/requels, whatever they're called these days, go make a sequel to Pineapple Express!!
This movie was so boring for 3/4 of it and then the other 1/4 of it was just disappointing. Cheap jump scares were below average. And the atmosphere and tension that made the original so amazing was nowhere to be seen!
Saw X and The Nun II are also in cinemas at the moment, go and see them instead because at least they're somewhat enjoyable!
This movie was so boring for 3/4 of it and then the other 1/4 of it was just disappointing. Cheap jump scares were below average. And the atmosphere and tension that made the original so amazing was nowhere to be seen!
Saw X and The Nun II are also in cinemas at the moment, go and see them instead because at least they're somewhat enjoyable!
I knew this was never going to surpass the original, but the trailers looked decent, so what the heck, right? The first red flag was the director. He did a pretty good job on the 2018 Halloween. Then the other two came out and oh my, talk about how to ruin a good thing. Now he decides to take the driver seat to one of the most iconic horror movies ever made. The two child actors do a good job, they do have some creepy scenes and the movie has some decent parts to it, but overall, I left the theater just feeling like things could have been executed better. Now I hear that this will be a trilogy now too? Yeah, no thanks.
Exorcist The Believer
Rating 2.7/5
Horror, Thriller
They completely missed the essence of the original 1973 film, The Exorcist.
Most of the people in the theater were elderly. Maybe they were excited because it had a sequel, but it mostly ended up being disappointing. It was cheesy watching the two kids being exorcised. There was no thrill. It felt like being on a roller coaster that only goes straight without any ups or downs.
Though the cinematography was decent, it helped in preventing the movie from being boring. The acting was okay but nothing special. There were some jump scares due to loud sound effects. But overall, it lacked the thrill and terror you expect from a horror movie. That's why people watch horror films, to be scared. At least it wasn't as ridiculous as The Nun, where the monster gained powers in the end. 😅
They completely missed the essence of the original 1973 film, The Exorcist.
Most of the people in the theater were elderly. Maybe they were excited because it had a sequel, but it mostly ended up being disappointing. It was cheesy watching the two kids being exorcised. There was no thrill. It felt like being on a roller coaster that only goes straight without any ups or downs.
Though the cinematography was decent, it helped in preventing the movie from being boring. The acting was okay but nothing special. There were some jump scares due to loud sound effects. But overall, it lacked the thrill and terror you expect from a horror movie. That's why people watch horror films, to be scared. At least it wasn't as ridiculous as The Nun, where the monster gained powers in the end. 😅
Ouch....
This was a terrible film, when will they realise that trashy followups such as this are just pointless and unnecessary. The original is a classic, a movie that lived on in the minds of people for decades, this one, you'll forget about within just a few days.
It was only about an hour and a half long, but it felt painfully long, nothing happens until the final ten minutes or so, but even that bit of excitement was underwhelming.
I was genuinely excited by the trailer, and seeing Ellen Burstyn added extra excitement, but the trailer flattered the film, credit to whomever put that together, sadly the film was drab, slow and totally uninteresting.
I know I'd mentally zoned out about two thirds through, but there seemed to be no explanation, who the demon was, what its purpose was, the story was just so disjointed, dare I say badly realised.
It should have been a Halloween chiller, it remained tepid from start to finish.
4/10.
This was a terrible film, when will they realise that trashy followups such as this are just pointless and unnecessary. The original is a classic, a movie that lived on in the minds of people for decades, this one, you'll forget about within just a few days.
It was only about an hour and a half long, but it felt painfully long, nothing happens until the final ten minutes or so, but even that bit of excitement was underwhelming.
I was genuinely excited by the trailer, and seeing Ellen Burstyn added extra excitement, but the trailer flattered the film, credit to whomever put that together, sadly the film was drab, slow and totally uninteresting.
I know I'd mentally zoned out about two thirds through, but there seemed to be no explanation, who the demon was, what its purpose was, the story was just so disjointed, dare I say badly realised.
It should have been a Halloween chiller, it remained tepid from start to finish.
4/10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesOn William Friedkin's passing, writer and film critic Ed Whitfield posted this on Twitter(X) and Facebook : "William Friedkin once said to me, 'Ed, the guy who made those new Halloween sequels is about to make one to my movie, L'Exorciste (1973). That's right, my signature film is about to be extended by the man who made Délire Express (2008). I don't want to be around when that happens. But if there's a spirit world, and I can come back, I plan to possess David Gordon Green and make his life a living hell.'" Friedkin actually died two months before the movie was released.
- Gaffes(at around 1h 3 mins) The demon in this movie, according to the credits, is Lamashtu, therefore, when it sees Chris McNeil, the "We've met before" quote is factually wrong since Chris met Pazuzu instead. However, Lamashtu was considered to be the wife of Pazuzu in ancient Mesopotamian mythology. This makes it not so much a "goof" as a clever reference to Pazuzu who, while depicted as Lamashtu's husband, was also the entity who opposed her extreme malevolence. In myth and legend, where you find one, you find the other.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Big Brother: Épisode #25.26 (2023)
- Bandes originalesKamimizye
Written by Yves Boyer and Wilfrid Lavoud (as Wilfred Lavaud)
Performed by Foula
Courtesy of Seven Seas Music
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Exorcist: Believer?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- El Exorcista: Creyentes
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 30 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 65 537 395 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 26 497 600 $US
- 8 oct. 2023
- Montant brut mondial
- 136 294 607 $US
- Durée
- 1h 51min(111 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant