Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist

Set in 1947, after surviving an encounter with Nazis in occupied Holland during World War II where he was forced to decide who would live and die (shattering his faith in the process), Father Lankester Merrin (Stellan Skarsgard) is on sabbatical from the Church having spent the intervening years as an archeologist at various digs in Africa. As Merrin excavates the remains of a Byzantine Christian church in the Turkana region of British Kenya, he is reluctantly directed by Major Granville (Julian Wadham) the overseer of the region to take along Father Francis (Gabriel Mann) to ensure the religious aspects of the find are respected. As the dig proceeds Merrin begins sparking the ire of the Turkana elders who are adherents of the old ways and believe the Church is cursed. Merrin also helps a physically deformed and mute outcast named Cheche (Billy Crawford) who has been shunned by the Turkana and hopes to help him with doctor Rachel Lesno's (Clara Bellar) assistance. As the site gets further excavated, an air of evil becomes to overtake the atmosphere.

Following the critical and commercial disappointment of the troubled production of Exorcist: The Beginning (in which nearly all of original director Paul Schrader's work was scrapped so Renny Harlin could produce an allegedly more "commercial" product), Morgan Creek met with Schrader about allowing him to assemble his own cut of the movie so it could be given a limited release. The studio only allocated $35,000 for the cut which meant that scoring, ADR, and the cinematographer couldn't be brought back meaning finding workarounds. The film was given a limited release of just only 100 theaters with little marketing, and went largely ignored at the box office making around $250,000. While critical reception was slightly improved from the Harlin version (with the exception of Exorcist author William Peter Blatty who warmly received it) many critics had the issue of a lack of fear from the film with its focus being more on a character piece. Dominion is a very flawed film undeniably, but it's also an ambitious one that for my money is worth a viewing.

With Schrader at the helm, the opening sequence where we see Merrin's encounter with the Nazis rather than the over the top crusader massacre of Exorcist: The Beginning is a much stronger opening as it creates a dramatic throughline for Merin as he struggles with the nature of evil as a grounded real-life presence in the world rather than an abstract demonic entity. This allows Merrin's experiences to come through more completely as he finds himself confronting a similar type of situation later in the film that helps build his arc in comparison to Exorcist: The Beginning where it was just sprinkled throughout randomly without much thought. The movie also features some different approaches to the supporting cast which make them feel more fully rounded as characters in comparison to Harlin's cut. Father Francis for instance (this time played by Gabriel Mann) is now something of a counterpoint to Merrin's character as we see him shaken in his faith from the same evil that drove Merrin away and he conveys that sense of tragedy quite nicely. We also have Billy Crawford as Cheche who wasn't in the Harlin cut and he gives much more emotional investment to the film than a character who served a similar purpose.

In many ways you can see Dominion as a complete flipside to Exorcist: The Beginning including the fact that where The Beginning was filled with over the top excess trying (and failing) to scare you, Dominion really is more of a slow burn drama that has a supernatural undercurrent rather than overt horror. Given the time the film was made in horror history where the output consisted of new "extreme" horror, polished Platinum Dune remakes, and Americanized remakes of Asian Horror popularized by The Ring, Dominion simply wouldn't have flown with mainstream audiences in a pre-A24 enviroment. That's not to say Dominion is on the level of an A24 film because it does have some undeniable issues such as the very flat "economical" post work that often makes the film feel more like an HBO 90s TV movie rather than a proper theatrical film which is no doubt a result of Morgan Creek refusing to authorizing funds to polish the end result. And while Dominion features less of the terrible CGI work in Exorcist: The Beginning, it still does rear its head even if there's less of it.

Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist is a flawed film that doesn't reach the level of The Exorcist or even Exorcist III, but if audiences are willing to forgive the more sparing approach to its take on horror, fear, and evil they'll find an ambitious if lowkey character study with some actual ideas that makes up for its lack of polish. A marked improvement from the bombastic and empty excess of Exorcist: The Beginning.

In all honesty, I have to say that between this work, and the Remy Harlin Exorcist prequel, the story is told, and told well. Unfortunately, you NEED to watch both versions in order to GET the whole story and see effects worth seeing.

I don't know which is worse, to make two versions of the same movie, and have them both fall short, or to have waited 30 plus years to get the story in the first place.

Either way, if you're an Exorcist fan, I highly recommend viewing both versions to get the whole picture.

It's neither worse, nor better than the Remy Harlin Version, and rates a 5.0/10 from...

the Fiend :.

I was among the lucky ones to see this film in Brussels too. Are you going to like this film or not ? Well it all depends on what you expect. As a horror film fan, for me there is no doubt : no one will ever make a better Exorcist film as William Friedkin's original. They can make 100 more exorcists, the 1st will remain the reference, it was innovating in many ways. Exorcist 2 took its best horror sequences from the first one. Number 3 was a cop movie. Now we have numbers 4 and 5 with the same story and even the same actors sometimes. So where is the difference ? I saw them both but I did not expect to see a better movie than the first. It is probably why I liked them both. So if you prefer horror, well see Harlin's one, it is a decent successor. And if you like Paul Shrader' s movies, I don't think you will be disappointed with his version, witch is softer but deeper. But please, as he said to the public before the film : forget everything you have seen about the exorcist movies before and watch the film with a open mind.

This 2005 "Exorcist" is so similar to the 2004 one, the fourth part, that I thought at times that I was mistakenly watching the same movie again. The only difference is that this fifth part is duller. Very dull.

This horror film contains all the no-nos of the genre. It's far too long with its 110 minutes. The look of the movie is utterly bland, and there is no atmosphere to speak of. Almost nothing happens in the first half-hour, and very little much else in the entire movie. There is more focus on the dull non-horror sub-plot regarding a brewing war between the tribe and the military than on the religious stuff.

When "Exorcist II" came out it was hard to imagine that anyone would ever make a worse entry in this very uneven series (only 1 and 3 are good), but I have to say that this monotonous piece of crap achieves that feat. At least the second part has some camp value, whereas this fifth part is just DULL.

Have I already mentioned that it's dull? You have been warned...

I found it fascinating at first, but it then dwindles to a boring talkie with a bit of action now and then. There were no real scares and it wasn't really frightening or disturbing, as we've come to expect from Exorcist movies. The CGI effects were very stocky, especially the animals. The hyenas were so stocky it was like watching a video game. As the film progressed, I related less and less to it, and later, found it very boring.