|
|
Post by GL on Aug 1, 2012 10:06:21 GMT -5
When a series of brutal killings rock a small town, the local police detective finds their resemblance to a long-dead killer's work and finds the truth behind the deaths to be done by a possessed madman, forcing him to stop the rampage before it's too late. What did everyone think of this one? |
|
|
|
Post by CT on Aug 1, 2012 16:02:44 GMT -5
I never saw this one but I hated II. Hopefully this one is better...?
|
|
|
|
Post by GL on Aug 2, 2012 10:03:35 GMT -5
Yeah, man, absolutely give it a go. I picked it because of that reason, it's an undiscovered gem that hardly anyone's seen because of the appalling reaction to part 2 (which I think is completely unjustified) so give it a shot.
PS: If you want a free way to view this without spending the money, the film's premiering on cable TV this month. It's on the Encore stations, not the main channel but one of the 15 different themed channels under the Encore banner.
|
|
HNT
 Grizzled HMaM Vet 
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Aug 2, 2012 11:10:28 GMT -5
I haven't seen it in about 20 or so years (I think I saw it in the theater and then never again) but GL is right. I remember it being very good and quite entertaining. It was written and directed by William Peter Blatty (author of The Exorcist novel) and I remember thinking it was pretty smart and clever. It is definitely a huge improvement over Part II, but I will reserve my vote until after I watch it again. It has been on telelvision a lot lately, so I imagine it won't be too tough to give it a look
|
|
|
|
Post by Jen on Aug 2, 2012 11:54:19 GMT -5
I actually really like this one as well, much better than I was expecting. I'll give it another watch before I rate it, been awhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Aug 4, 2012 1:41:06 GMT -5
I give it a four. I actually prefer it over the original. I'll elaborate more after I give it a long overdue rewatch.
|
|
|
|
Post by GL on Aug 6, 2012 10:47:52 GMT -5
Wow, everyone's having to give it a rewatch? If I would've known that, I'd have picked an easier film like 'London After Midnight'.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Aug 6, 2012 18:27:12 GMT -5
I've had it in the back of my mind to revisit lately anyway.This thread has bought it to the forefront.  That can only be a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by GL on Aug 7, 2012 10:13:05 GMT -5
Indeed it can. I guess I'll take credit for that. |
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Aug 7, 2012 10:40:04 GMT -5
Haha, I saw it finally. I will give it a 3.5 or so, but I will round up to a generous 4. It actually had a couple of scenes that actually got under my skin. Not easy to do with a religious themed film, because I'm not much of a believer.
|
|
HNT
Grizzled HMaM Vet
Horror in General & Everything Else Moderator[/i]
Kiss my tuchis
Posts: 6,296
|
Post by HNT on Aug 28, 2012 14:25:18 GMT -5
Ok, at the risk of irritating folks for my double post (which I apologize for) I will try to rekindle this discussion a bit. Personally, I found the Gemini killer plot interesting up until the final reveal, which I won't spoil here. Needless to say, some of the possessiona nd jumping back and forth of the demon(s) was a little goofy to me. And, the movie mostly had a lot dialog and not so much action, which was a little lame.
|
|
|
|
Post by GL on Aug 29, 2012 10:27:00 GMT -5
I agree somewhat on the lack of action (my rating of a 4.5 went down to a solid 4 instead of up to 5 is because of the dreary pace at times) but I found the possession and body hopping far more creepy than I expected. It's not a common-enough theme for me for body-jumping because I find that a very creepy premise in concept, and that's done nicely here the few times it hints at it.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Aug 29, 2012 19:14:20 GMT -5
It's because of the lack of action that's had me stall on re-watching.I think this is a great film,but I have to be 100% positive that I'm in the mood for it.
That said some of the things you talk about here ( "the jumping back and forth of the demon") were added by over zealous producers, whom wanted it to live up to The Exorcist title - which William Peter Blatty didn't even want - it was meant to be called Legion,just like the book it was based on.
Brad Dourif's whole Gemini role was done in reshoots - it was only meant to be Karras in the cell. That sort of diluted Blatty's whole point with the film - the line between religious fanaticism and schizophrenia ( well that's what I take from it anyway ). And that is a big part of the reason why I prefer it over the vastly overrated original piece of Catholic propaganda.
|
|
|
|
Post by GL on Aug 30, 2012 9:59:09 GMT -5
So, is that a good thing or bad thing? I can't really tell from that whether you liked it or hated it.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Walking Dude on Sept 2, 2012 19:35:30 GMT -5
Oh I loved it.I still like those elements,but it's probably the difference between my 4 rating and something a bit higher.
|
|
HMaM Global Mod
HMaM Global Mod
Our FB Admin
