Exorcist II: The Heretic
Exorcist II: The Heretic
3.810%13%
Bizarre nightmares plague Regan MacNeil four years after her possession and exorcism. Has the demon returned? And if so, can the combined faith and knowledge of a Vatican investigator and a research specialist free her from its grasp?
A Cinematic Free Fall from Masterpiece to Madness
The Exorcist remains, for me, the greatest horror film ever made - an absolute masterclass in atmosphere, character, and philosophical depth. So revisiting its sequel, Exorcist II: The Heretic, feels like witnessing one of the greatest crashes in cinematic history. To go from such an intelligent, grounded, and terrifying original to this fever dream of metaphysical nonsense is, frankly, baffling. It’s a sequel that not only misses the mark but seems to actively misunderstand everything that made the first film resonate.
At first, I was curious - intrigued, even. The opening hour attempts something at least conceptually interesting. The idea of re-examining Father Merrin's death, of dealing with the aftermath and psychological scars left by the events of the first film, had potential. I thought the film might genuinely offer a thoughtful continuation. In fact, up until the one-hour mark, I was actually on board, hovering around a 6.5 rating. But then... it all goes completely off the rails. What unfolds afterward is so astonishingly incoherent, so riddled with poor creative decisions, that I could hardly believe what I was watching.
Instead of continuing the psychological and spiritual horror tone, the film detours into bizarre sci-fi territory, introducing dream-synchronizing machines, telepathic trances, and some convoluted mythology around Pazuzu, the demon from the first film. Father Lamont's journey to Africa in search of the demon’s origins feels like a different movie altogether - one with no coherent narrative anchor. The use of hypnotic devices like the Synchronizer, shared dream states, reincarnation themes, and a kind of pseudo-spiritual quest gives this sequel the tone of esoteric fantasy rather than horror. The whole thing plays like a metaphysical fever dream that just never wakes up.
John Boorman, who previously directed the excellent Deliverance, apparently never wanted to make a horror film and had even rejected the first Exorcist script for being “too evil.” Ironically, he ended up helming the sequel - only to veer so far from horror that what’s left feels almost parodic. His intent was to make a spiritual adventure, but what we got was an awkward, self-serious, and mystifying misfire.
The behind-the-scenes issues are evident. The script was reportedly rewritten several times during production. Richard Burton, as Father Lamont, seems visibly confused and disconnected, and his performance - affected, stiff, and hollow - doesn't help the chaos. Rumors of Burton’s drinking on set feel plausible given how disinterested he often appears. Linda Blair does her best with what little she’s given, and to her credit, she remains a watchable presence, even if she refused to recreate any of the more disturbing possessed sequences from the original. That creative limitation may have been a factor, but it only further dilutes any remaining horror.
The infamous scenes with telepathic devices, shared dreams, and synchronized visions are unintentionally hilarious. The dialogue ranges from stilted to absurd. The film’s most absurd image - Regan swinging on a psychic swing set during a hypnosis session - is a moment that perfectly sums up just how far this movie has strayed from its roots.
Visually, there are some impressive sequences. The African vistas and a few dreamlike tableaus show that Boorman hasn’t lost his eye for imagery. Ennio Morricone's score, though inconsistent in tone, has moments of real beauty, even if it sometimes feels mismatched with what's on screen. But that’s just it - beautiful fragments surrounded by utter nonsense. The presence of massive swarms of locusts, bizarre voiceovers, and half-baked theology renders much of the movie unwatchable. It’s as though it’s trying to be 2001: A Space Odyssey meets Jungian dream therapy - just with demons and telepathy.
Critics at the time echoed my thoughts. Roger Ebert famously called it “a completely ridiculous movie,” while others considered it one of the worst sequels ever made. And decades later, that sentiment hasn't changed. It remains a cautionary tale in filmmaking: proof that ambition without clarity and thematic coherence can produce something spectacularly misguided.
Exorcist II: The Heretic is fascinating only in the way a car crash is - you can’t quite look away, but you also wish you hadn’t seen it. What makes it worse is how seriously the film takes itself. There’s no self-awareness, no ironic distance, no sense of horror craftsmanship. It’s pompous, confused, and totally divorced from the terrifying simplicity of its predecessor.
In the end, I was left wondering how a studio - and everyone involved - signed off on this final product. It’s not just a bad sequel. It’s one of the most baffling follow-ups in movie history. A spiritual journey gone wrong in every way imaginable. If the original was a masterstroke of cinema, this was its unholy shadow - rambling, ridiculous, and utterly cursed.