As a card-carrying horror geek (seriously, I had cards made), I already heard the oft-recounted tale of this beleaguered, on-again, off-again, sorta-on-again, way-off-again production. Everything from buzzings of the original "EXORCIST Curse" returning to claim the life of the project's first attached director, John Frankenheimer; to Paul Schrader's original, existential cut which was subsequently shelved in its entirety by Warner after allegedly disastrous pre-screenings; the subsequent re-casting (except for the lead) and expensive page-one rewrite and reshoot of the whole kit and kaboodle by... wait for it... the director of CUTTHROAT ISLAND. Needless to say, out of all the big studios' remakes, sequels, and "re-imaginings" (a term employed by the creatively bankrupt) of some revered horror classic or another, this was one I was quite stubbornly prepared to hate the crap out of.

As much as I'd love to tell you that I was pleasantly shocked - like I was by the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake, which I'd refused to see up to the opening weekend, but which I gotta admit was pretty fucking cool. Sadly, that just didn't happen with EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING. It wasn't necessarily a waste of my time either, but come on. This is the backstory to THE EXORCIST, for crying out loud. And a period piece to boot! To a horror fan, that's like trying to write a prologue to Genesis.

Admittedly, this isn't the first time Warner has failed spectacularly in expanding the original film's canvas. In fact, I'd go as far as to say this is probably the least disappointing attempt to cash in on the franchise. For example, EXORCIST III (directed by the original book's author, William Peter Blatty) runs a distant second, with some amazingly chilling setpieces, but turns to utter dog-dick in the final reel (no doubt studio execs cried, "Where's the exorcism stuff? We demand gallons of pea soup!"). John Boorman's EXORCIST II, on the other hand, is just plain awful from start to finish... but it's so delightfully deranged, it makes an awesome party flick if you're stoned enough.

So anyhow, enough with the backstory, and on to the devil shit.

For those of you in the know (and the rest of you can suck it), the original EXORCIST was not just the story of a cute little kid spinning her head like a party favor, whizzing on the rug and getting jiggy with a crucifix. It was also about the decades-long spiritual warfare waged between the ancient African demon Pazuzu and his human nemesis, Father Merrin (originally played by Max Von Sydow, well-played here by the always compelling Stellan Skarsgard). The origins of this metaphysical battle of wills, only hinted at in the original (detailed a bit more in the novel), are fleshed out here on an epic canvas.

The story opens in the late '40s, with a younger Merrin having abandoned the priesthood after a horrific event in his past (without revealing too much, suffice to say it involves Nazis, kids and bullets) to assist archaeologists on a dig in Kenya, where they have uncovered the near-perfect remains of a Byzantine-era church buried deep underground. This surreal site becomes the focal point for a series of increasingly apocalyptic events (that seem to draw more inspiration from THE OMEN than from the EXORCIST pantheon) as an unseen, malevolent force seems to be working its way through the surrounding village. Worse, a more tangible horror (and one too close to comfort for Merrin) descends on the village as British colonial troops set up shop and attempt to quell what they wrongly perceive as a local uprising (much like the basic premise of THE KEEP), answering any hint of insurrection with brutal violence.

Still steadfastly refuting his priestly calling, Merrin is nevertheless drawn further into the ancient puzzle and the secret which lies beneath the church, compelled by his historical inquisitiveness - and by his newfound attraction to the camp's melancholy nurse (Izabella Scorupco), a concentration-camp survivor with whom Merrin shares a bond of spiritual pain. As events spiral to the inevitable Good-vs-Evil Smackdown, Merrin is slowly forced to realize that his calling as a spiritual warrior is inescapable - and since this is an EXORCIST movie, you just know he's gonna dig out his dog-eared copy of the Roman Rituals and start flinging that holy water.

In theory, this scenario (adapted a second time from best-selling author Caleb Carr's original story) has the potential for a spiritually weighty, doom-laden epic, and in some respects Harlin's version nearly fulfills that order - abetted in no small part by Vittorio Storaro's stunning, rich and truly nightmarish cinematography and a suitably ominous score by Trevor Rabin (Michael Kamen was originally attached as composer before his untimely death… the curse again?). It actually cast my mind back to Harlin's promising low-budget debut, PRISON, which seemed at the time to indicate the seeds of a visionary new horror director. Then it seems he strayed a bit too far from his calling. And I refuse to count DEEP BLUE SEA - one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen - but at least it steered him back to the genre wherein his strengths lie. It's claimed that the studio ditched Schrader's version because it was too cerebral, opting instead for a louder, faster and gorier approach... and when it comes to loud, fast and gory, they definitely got their man.

Not that the film actually works - it does sporadically, I guess - but just like EXORCIST III, it completely loses its marbles in the last fifteen minutes with the requisite exorcism climax, where I guess the honchos wanted to out-Linda-Blair the original, resulting in a noisy, laughable CGI mess of ungodly proportions (pardon the pun). Again, I won't spoil it for those willing to take a gander by revealing exactly what happens in those concluding moments, but I'll bet demons to donuts you'll feel pretty screwed by the ultimate payoff. Until Warner decides to crack the first version out of movie jail and give it a DVD release (or you find a decent bootleg), this is all ya get for now: a passable blood-and-thunder spookshow that looks and sounds great, but which possesses (hee hee, puns aplenty) none of the profound subtext, depth of character development and psychological nuances that made the original film a legend not only in horror cinema, but in film history itself. Time will tell (perhaps) if Schrader's version might be more memorable.

Too bad, considering the inclusion of that film would have made for an awesome double-disc presentation - they could have just tacked on the "Version You've Never Seen" pitch again and saved hiring a new PR team. Oh, well. What Warner does provide in the way of supplemental material is rather sketchy: commentary from Harlin, a few fluffy EPK featurettes, and the theatrical trailer. Harlin's track is interesting, but doesn't shed as much light on the whole "Let's start over and make it really scary this time" issue as I'd hoped. He does talk about being virtually crippled throughout the shoot due to a nasty car accident, which again plays into the "EXORCIST curse" phenomenon, if you're into that kinda crap.

The film itself gets a nice treatment, with a sharp (16X9 enhanced) Panavision transfer that captures the deep, rich textures and pitch-black abysses created by Storaro's impeccable camerawork and surrealist lighting. Sound is equally clear and robust, making good use of surround effects (in Dolby and DTS) for Harlin's plentiful, shameless "EEK!" stingers and a vortex of spooky music and ambient SFX.

So is this a positive or negative critique? Well, kinda-sorta both. I mean, let's face it, we all knew this would not fall anywhere in the league of William Friedkin's masterpiece, but frankly, it's not a bad film if taken on its own merits. Scary? Sometimes, though hardly the soul-shuddering nightmare the first film induced in audiences in '73. Fun? Mostly, although the deliberate audience-pandering gets a bit old, and occasional bad CGI effects tend to defuse some of the better scare scenes. (To wit: a shocking moment involving a pack of possessed hyenas would have been downright chilling if they didn't look like deranged rejects from a Jaguar ad.) But for the most part, it's consistently interesting and seldom boring.

But is it art? Fuck no. Material with this kind of epic potential should be treated with more intelligence than the "Ooga-booga" approach that predominates Harlin's cinematic toolkit. Oh, well. Just keep bugging Warner to release the Schrader version, and we'll have the chance to witness something that substandard Hollywood sequels/remakes almost never get: a second chance at greatness. Maybe this is just "The Beginning" after all.

Check out the official site