For today's 31 Days of Hell entry, Andrew breaks down the details behind the two divisive Exorcist prequels and the history behind the films.
 |
| "Like my Linda Blair makeup? No? How about these boobs then?" |
In 2004,
writer-director Paul Schrader began work on his version of Exorcist: The Beginning. Courtesy of Morgan Creek entertainment, it depictedFather Merrin’s (Stellan Skarsgård) first encounter with
the demon Pazuzu in East Africa.
Contrary to Morgan Creek’s expectations for a standard horror item,
Schrader turned in a rough cut of what was ultimately deemed a ‘commercially
unmarketable’ psychological drama.
Schrader’s $30 million drama was shelved and Schrader was fired from
production. In an unprecedented move,
Morgan Creek opted for hiring director Renny Harlin and starting from scratch,
pouring $50 million into the extensive reshoots, rewrites and recasting
interspersed with portions Schrader already shot, totaling $80 million. Essentially, Skarsgård, cinematographer
Vittorio Storaro and crew treaded the same locations and set pieces yet two
distinctly different films were made out of executive fears Schrader’s version
would fail commercially.
Schrader’s picture was slated as a bonus feature to be
included with the DVD release of Harlin’s version, but after poor box office
performances and overwhelmingly negative press, it was decided the Schrader
version would have a fair shot at a limited theatrical release under the new
title Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist.
Despite being the first time a major studio
released two different versions of the same movie since the 1955 Rodgers and
Hammerstein musical Oklahoma! was
shot simultaneously in Cinemascope 35mm and Todd AO 70mm, Warner Brothers would
ultimately lose money from both productions and the critics were equally
unkind, if not more, to Schrader’s vision.
Still, for William Peter Blatty, who despised Harlin’s film but admired
Schrader’s film a great deal, Exorcist:
The Beginning and Dominion: Prequel
to the Exorcist represented a unique chapter in the history of the
checkered franchise borne out of one of the greatest horror films of all time.
Exorcist: The
Beginning (2004 – directed by Renny Harlin)
In both Harlin’s film and the Schrader film, Stellan Skarsgård
portrays Father Merrin in an opening prologue over an incident in Nazi occupied
Holland during WWII. His faith is called
into question when a Nazi SS commander forces Merrin to participate in the
choosing of random victims to be executed in lieu of the entire village being
massacred instead. Broken by the
experience, Father Merrin relocates to East Africa on an archeological dig with
a British excavation team in the Turkana region of Kenya. During the dig, the ancient Christian
Byzantine church is discovered and once the sealed church doors are broken, a
bizarre torrent of supernatural and demonic events are unleashed. Tensions between tribesmen of the region and
British cavalry begin to rise with the same frequency as demonic hyena attacks
and other ongoing atrocities.
 |
| "Dude. I just love movies about bondage." |
It is here that Harlin’s adaptation shifts gears and
begins recounting the iconography and tropes of Friedkin’s 1973 film rather
than being its own unique entity. Instead
of a new take on the demon Father Merrin would inevitably engage in theological
warfare, we get the same Eileen Dietz/Linda Blair facial makeup designed by
renowned makeup artist Dick Smith in 1973.
The familiarity of this, the provocative dialogue and sexual gestures
acted out by Blair years ago just comes off as lazy and laughable here.
In a short amount of time, Harlin’s idiotic
and derivative exercise manages to deep six any faith we might have had in his
overtly exploitative B movie with an A-list budget behind it. Contrary to the realism deployed by
Friedkin’s impeccable masterpiece, Harlin’s overblown gorefest is insipid and,
frankly, insulting to watch. I suppose
you shouldn’t be hard pressed to expect much from the guy who killed off Samuel
L. Jackson with a terrible Playstation-1 looking shark attack in his equally
execrable Deep Blue Sea.
Dominion:
Prequel to the Exorcist (2005 – directed by Paul Schrader)
 |
| "This cave is so bright. Science!" |
Stymied and shelved by prurient forces only interested in
thick skulled exploitation, Paul Schrader’s original adaptation of the same
screenplay and production found limited theatrical release after the abysmal
failure of the Renny Harlin version of the film. Instead of blood and guts, Schrader’s quiet,
thoughtful meditation on Father Merrin’s encounter with the forces of evil is
less interested in scares than trying to portray legitimate spiritual conflict. While the Harlin and Schrader films follow
the same locations, sets, and basic premise, Schrader’s demonic possession is
far more interesting in unique.
As
opposed to the lazy Dick Smith makeup ripoff, Schrader presents Cheche, an
introverted, physically deformed boy ostracized for his oppressive appearance. As Cheche becomes possessed, his crippling
ugliness begins to melt away until he is of perfect physique and beauty by the
time the demon has fully inhabited the boy.
It’s a unique and thought provoking twist on the nature of demonic
possession and serves as a startling antithesis to what people have come to
expect. When Merrin finally frees Cheche
of the demon, he returns to his formerly grotesque self. Also unique in Schrader’s film is his
handling of the mounting tensions between the tribesmen and the British
military forces occupying the region.
Where Harlin kept the entanglements in the background, Schrader brings
it to the forefront and makes the dilemma integral to the story instead of just
another aspect of the ensuing atrocities.
 |
| "Yes, father. I know all about you Catholic priests. But, I refuse to take off my pants." |
Sadly, Schrader’s film also suffers greatly from the
studio’s lack of interest in the piece, with some of the worst CGI effects ever
incorporated into a major film production.
When the awful looking hyenas and carnivorous cattle appear onscreen,
consideration of Warner’s refusal to offer monetary assistance of any kind to
complete the picture must be taken into consideration. Had Schrader earned more support for what is
ultimately a largely unfinished project, he might have had more artistic
success. It’s a shame the drama created
by Schrader, which is involving, believable and immediate, is ruined by
technical shortcomings of this nature.
Schrader also borrows shots from Harlin’s film to complete unfinished
shots and David Lynch’s composer Angelo Badalamenti steps in to provide some
cues to fill in the gaps.
After viewing
Schrader’s film, you can understand why the studio passed on it initially, as
it’s not exactly horror or much of a thriller.
Still, while one must admit neither film version propositioned by Warner
Brothers is much to make a fuss over, Schrader at least tried to provide a new
and therefore necessary take on material that demanded more of the same. It’s worth noting that between the two films,
William Peter Blatty took dump on Harlin’s film but heralded Schrader’s film as
a classy piece of work.
-Andrew Kotwicki