ElectricWarlock's Replies


I enjoyed it as well. I think people bashed it simply for being an exorcism film. It is not the most popular horror subgenre these days, as people feel there have been way too many the past 10-15 years and think "they're all the same." It's become trendy to hate exorcism movies just as it was trendy to hate "torture porn" in the 2000s. But I thought there was a lot to enjoy in this one. One thing that sets it apart is that it is written and directed by the son of Jason Miller, Father Karras in The Exorcist. I felt that helped him bring in a unique perspective, as he would've grown up with the most famous exorcism movie in the world always in the background of his life. And I enjoyed the references to his father's film, particularly "the Exorcist curse." Also, coming from a dysfunctional family with lots of estrangement, the themes of redemption and forgiveness really resonated with me. As did the speech at the ending about how just because someone forgives doesn't mean the pain of what happened goes away, nor does the guilt from knowing the pain you've caused. The killer in the backseat The 2nd story, Humans Can Lick Too. With the wraparound segment, I knew those kids were really dead from an accident the moment they set foot out of the car. That twist has been recycled in anthology films many, many times. But I do like it a lot other than the predictable ending. It must just be a matter of your personal taste. I've enjoyed many horror films about creepy kids such as Village of the Damned, Who Can Kill A Child?, Joshua, The Omen, Devil Times Five, Brightburn, Goodnight Mommy, etc. I even enjoyed this one. It works, it just doesn't work for you just as romantic comedies don't work for me. So I don't watch them. Apparently there will be 2 more "strangers" with different masks in the future ones. It bugged me that no one seemed to notice or care the maintenance man was missing. No one seemed to be looking for him or seemed too bothered about his disappearance, as they never really mentioned it any further. You'd think the police would easily be able to find the address he was supposed to be working at on that day, the same house that was broken into recently, and put 2 and 2 together. But no one seemed to care much. Also it wouldn't have taken them very long to find the boyfriend's bloody corpse in that public restroom either. How did the family not hear anything about that? News travels fast this day and age. That's 2 people connected to this family (whose house was broken into) missing/dead and the cops don't follow up on it? This killer seems to be able to murder people and then nobody really cares that they're dead. I guess he's good at picking his victims, choosing people that nobody will care are gone. That is what bothered me the most besides the killer being annoying and wasting a lot of time doing stupid stuff for no apparent reason. Yes, the killer got on my nerves after a while. He was creepy at first but after a while I was thinking "Would you just get on with it and do whatever you're going to do?" It just seemed like he was doing a lot of stupid and pointless stuff for no reason. I'm disappointed but not surprised. It was overshadowed by 2 other religious themed horror movies coming out right before it (Immaculate and Late Night With the Devil) for one. Then you have some of the hate for The Exorcist: Believer spilling over. It is still very fresh in peoples' minds so they probably thought "Oh great. Another generic supernatural horror movie trying to make money off a classic." It is just bad timing all the way around. It needed Eddie and Marilyn desperately. I get that it was a prequel and he wanted to tell a story that had never been told before, but it doesn't seem like there was enough story there to fill a 2 hour movie. Eddie and Marilyn had to enter the family somehow, so they should've been in it. Without them it felt like a kids' movie without any kid characters for its audience to relate to. And if it's too juvenile for adults, but too mature for kids, then who exactly is the intended audience? I thought I was probably the only one who noticed. You can think whatever you want, it doesn't make it true. If that is the case, she should still be Heather Donahue because that was far from a terrible movie. And the girl who played Allison was a Taylor Swift lookalike to me. All Night Operator definitely It is an Australian movie. Nothing to do with America. And I don't recall mentions of God or Satan anywhere in this movie. Maybe a supernatural, demonic presence implies religious subject matter but it wasn't directly stated. If you don't like them, don't watch them. I'm not a Taylor Swift fan so I'm not going to watch her concert movie, but I'm not going to try to get it taken away from those who are. I'll just watch something I will like instead. My understanding was that he was already recovered when Mia went to visit him and his mother at the hospital. But the demonic entity wanted Mia to think he was still sick so it could trick her into killing him Linda cares more about her animal welfare charity these days than she does about acting. I suspect she didn't want a big role because she'd have to spend too much time away from her foundation. Traditionally no Exorcist movie beyond the first has been a big moneymaker. "Requels" are the big trend of the moment and supernatural horror has been pretty big the past 10-15 years with Paranormal Activity, The Conjuring, and Insidious proving to be 3 of the biggest horror franchises of the 21st century. But neither of those things guarantee an Exorcist sequel would be a huge success. The first time anyone tried to make a sequel, it was called "one of the worst horror movies of all time." And Warner Bros. wasted so much money making 2 prequels before. Scrapping an entire $30 million movie when they didn't have faith in it and paying $50 million to make another, only for it to flop as well. Besides the first, only the 3rd has a bit of a cult following. Frankly, it would be naive and a little dumb for them to gamble that much when the franchise hasn't done so great in the past. And I don't think a reputable studio would do something that stupid. I still believe the $400 million is either an Internet rumor that grew out of control or they must have the rights to the entire franchise and its merchandising. But what does that deal include? Is it just so they could make their trilogy or are they making money off the other 5 films, the TV show, and all the Exorcist merchandise out there as well? There is also an Exorcist maze at Halloween Horror Nights and I know millions of people go there each year. It should make a lot of that money back. That's not to mention whatever the movie will make on Digital, Blu-ray/DVD, and eventually Peacock. If the deal really even happened, which I have my doubts. It could just be a rumor that got blown out of all proportion. Did Fox have to pay that much to make their TV show? I don't think they owned the rights before.