User reviews

Exorcist III (1990) was the follow up to the classic Exorcist. Despite the number three next to the title, this was the true sequel to the first film. Writer/ Director William Peter Blatty wanted to simply call the movie "Legion" like the name of his novel. But the producers wanted to cash in on the Exorcist name so he caved into pressure. In Europe it's called Legion: Exorcist III. This wasn't going to be the first or the last conflict Blatty would have with the producers. The novel was a straight forward mystery/ thriller. The producer wanted some gore and "exorcism" thrown into the mix. Blatty wanted to make an atmospheric horror film, the producers wanted a prototypical 80's horror film. The producers wanted Jason Miller and an exorcism! Who won out?

The film follows the friendship between Father Dyer and Detective Kinderman. Meanwhile a serial killer is running around Georgetown gruesomely murdering the city's residents. Kinderman is called into duty and is puzzled by the brutal slayings. That is until he follows the clues and they lead him to a very unlikely place. Kinderman's faith in man is tested as he continues on through out this bizarre and seemingly never ending case.

George C. Scott is excellent as Kinderman. he plays the role of the detective as if he was tailored made for the part. Ed Flanders co-stars as Father Dyer. Nicol Williamson has a guest star spot as a Father Merrin type priest (his scenes seemed to have been added during post production because they don't fit in with the rest of the movie). The ending felt rushed and it has "post production" stamped on it. Word has it that the film was indeed tampered with during the post production. I think so to because the book's ending was far different than what was put out on the silver screen.

Is the movie worth watching? Yes it is because it's a worthy follow up to the Exorcist. Even though it was fiddled around with during the final phase of production, scenes seem to have been added and the ever presence of the producers looking over the director's shoulder, it's still a great film. I'm probably one of the few people who are actually satisfied with the movie. I wished Blatty could have the original version of this film restored. I enjoyed the book and the movie as well.

Highly recommended!

A majority of people hate intellectual horror films. What's wrong with having to think once in a while?

William Peter Blatty can really write. Prose and dialogue. No argument. But can he direct a movie? On the strength of 'Exorcist III,' yes he can. This isn't to say that the film doesn't have its problems. On the contrary, its biggest problem, the out-of-character 'crowd-pleasing' SFX climax stops it from being one of the greats. So why do I have a soft spot for this film? If, like me, you appreciate horror films that are both scary and made for grown-ups, 'Exorcist III' is refreshing and memorable for its intelligent, non-ironic journey into darkness and for its refusal (bar that ending) to dumb down for the kids. If 'Scream' is your idea of a great horror movie, this isn't one for you! The cast is not nearly young and attractive enough, there are nowhere near enough gags (though Blatty's dry, sardonic wit is happily in evidence) and the film has no pretensions at being an autopsy of the genre, therefore somehow lifting it above the films it purports to comment on. 'Exorcist III' is literary beyond 'Scream's' self-referential trivia-chasing (I would love to hear Detective Kinderman critiquing that movie!) Read 'Legion' and you'll have an idea of how good the film should have been. Flaws acknowledged and accepted, don't miss out on Brad Dourif's best performance since 'Cuckoo's Nest,' scene-stealing turns by Ed Flanders and Nancy Fish, or the superlative production design, photography and sound. More than anything else, it's the atmosphere of the film that stays with me. I can recall very few films that have a better sense of the power of stillness and silence. So much of the violence is communicated only in dialogue; your mind reluctantly does the rest.

I first noticed this film on YouTube in a series of videos that list "scariest movie moments." One of the scenes selected was from this movie and since it sent a chill down my spine so I decided to give the rest of the film a chance. That's when my blood damn near froze.

Seeing that "Exorcist III" is a third entry in a franchise in which the second film has a very low reputation and the fourth didn't exactly draw much noise probably gets many people to overlook this film. The fact is that it is the Exorcist label that works against it. This is not really an exorcist movie as the original source novel was similar in theme, but not a sequel to Blatty's "The Exorcist." The exorcism scene was added in the middle of production and it feels slightly out of place with the rest of the film.

However, it also provides an eerie element as the re-shot scenes has Jason Miller and the originally shot scenes had Brad Dourif and the final product cuts back between the two. It works in a creepy way, just watch and you'll understand. Though the film's best part is the incredible atmosphere. It is really something. Haunting music, dream sequences, and good mixture of the classic "jump scare" along with some brilliant "quiet scares" for lack of better word. The scene that drew me to this film is an almost update of the infamous "spider-walk" from the first "Exorcist." It is a terrifically designed scene, among many I might add, so you begin to wonder why Blatty didn't direct more films? I am almost itching to see what else he could come up with on screen.

This is a thoroughly enjoyable and smart horror film with above average acting, writing, directing, and design as well as everything else. And it is best thought of as separate from the Exorcist series, just like the book was, even if it does include an exorcism. --- 8/10

Rated R for violent content/terror. Ages 13+

With a title like 'Excorcist 3', one doesn't hope for much. But in fact, this film is really only so titled to exploit the value attached with the name, and although it was written (and also directed) by the writer of the original film, it's actually a stand-alone movie in it's own right. And while William Blatty may be hard pushed to rival the efforts of the original's director, William Friedkin, he doesn't do too bad a job: he's a little over-reliant on abrupt cutting to achieve his shocks, and the budget for the special effects was obviously inadequate, but this is a suspenseful and chilling thriller. All supernatural movies suffer from a degree of innate silliness, and satanic movies perhaps especially so, but this film is constructed as if it was a conventional serial killer thriller, albeit an exceptionally dark and creepy one. As the signs of actual devilry begin to increase, the detective leading the case (played brilliantly by George Scott) starts to wonder if he's going mad. Only when the film is forced, near its conclusion, to represent the nightmare literally, does it inevitably become a little daft (but that charge could even be levied at 'The Excorcist' itself). I'm not generally a huge fan of horror movies, but this one is definitely above average, for its skill in modulating the tension and in restraining from excess until its final scenes. In conclusion, ignore the title, and watch.

Most people go to horror movies for the emotional thrill, the gore and/or the adrenaline high of having things pop out and yell "boo!" Make no mistake: you won't find much of that here. So if you're looking for a movie that will make you spill your popcorn, you might wanna move on.

But if you're looking for a true psychological thriller (psychological = appealing to the intellect, not the viscera), this will be one hell of a treat for you. The dialogue is fantastic. The acting is superb (Brad Dourif & George C. Scott on the same screen. What could be better?). The philosophy is provocative. And the mood is as thick as it gets. Much of the movie is composed of a series of dialogues between two people in a dark room. If you liked the second half of APOCALYPSE NOW, you will enjoy this immensely.

I rank this movie as one of my all time English language faves with the likes of AMADEUS, 2001, Alfred Hitchcock's ROPE, PICTURE OF DORIAN GRAY, and CITIZEN KANE. I'm serious; it's that good. Unfortunately, it was marketed to the wrong audience, and that's why it received such low ratings. Let me repeat: this is not a spooky movie. It's actually a very intellectual story with a lot of big words, literary overtones and powerful acting, and it's one of the few movies which I consider superior to the book (but of course writer Blatty directed this, so I'd expect no less).

Now don't get me wrong; it's anything but dull. There is one scene in particular that will scare the living crap out of you! It's a long scene done with one still camera, no music, no sound, hardly any action... but egads it's probably the most suspenseful/frightening thing I've ever seen in any movie.

In the style of the classic thrillers, so much is left to the imagination of the viewer--and oh there is PLENTY of disturbing, shocking stuff to imagine. In one conversation you'll hear about a murder so vile that you'll never want to hear the word "catheter" again. And the beauty is that you never see a thing. If this subtle style appeals to you, then you certainly won't be disappointed.

10/10. And I don't give 10s very often.

After the catastrophically inept, EXORCIST 2: THE HERETIC, it seemed that any further sequels would only make matters worse. Then, the original author, William Peter Blatty, took the Director's chair and made THE EXORCIST 3.

Picking up 15 years after the events of THE EXORCIST, Lt. Kinderman (now played by George C. Scott) is on the trail of a serial murderer with a penchant for religious symbolism. When his old friend, Father Dyer (Ed Flanders) seems to have become the latest victim, Kinderman becomes obsessed with the case. As he digs deeper, facts come to light that can't possibly be. In addition, events occur that defy logic and point to the supernatural.

When Kinderman encounters a certain mental patient (Brad Dourif), he begins to realize that he's up against something beyond his own understanding.

Blatty proves his ability to recapture some of the malevolence of the first film, using omens and weird happenings in subtle ways, while building the story methodically. Set mostly in a hospital, he makes the best of the limited, claustrophobic surroundings. Dourif gives the performance of his career, embodying his character and imbuing it with true madness and malice. A tremendous horror film in its own right, this is the worthy sequel to the original.

P.S.- Watch for great performances by Nicol Williamson (VENOM) as Father Morning, and Viveca Lindfors (CREEPSHOW) as Nurse X...

A police lieutenant uncovers more than he bargained for as his investigation of a series of murders, which have all the hallmarks of the deceased 'Gemini' serial killer, lead him to question the patients of a psychiatric ward.

Although I actually enjoyed the second "Exorcist" film, most people consider it a stinker and like to pretend it never happened. For those people, this is the right film to watch. A great tale of possession, that follows rather directly (though belatedly) from the original.

George C. Scott adds a certain weight to any film. Just as he did for "The Changeling", he makes what could be a forgettable horror film into something really worthwhile. He is a vastly underrated actor.

The Book "The Exorcist". Author, and "The Exorcist" (1972) Oscar-Winning Screenplay Scribe, William Peter Blatty, Writes and Directs this Spin-Off.

Frustrating His Efforts were Continuous Interference from the "Money Men" from Everything from the Title, Blatty Wanted "Legion", the Title of His Follow-Up Book.

He was Also Forced to Totally Edit and Redo the 3rd Act, Making Demands that "Father Karras" (Jason Miller) be Included in the Screen-Play, and On and On.

The Final Film, as Blatty had No Out and Capitulated, does Include These Significant Changes and More.

But the Movie is so Creepy and Unsettling, both Dialog and Images, that it Sustains the Changes and is a Disturbing, Worthy Watch in the Supernatural-Horror Genre.

A Movie that has Outstanding Acting from a Great Cast.

Including George C. Scott, Brad Dourif, and Ed Flanders, Along with a Sarcastic Script Peppered with Gut-Wrenching Horror and Thrills, with Sharp Expressionist Cinematography.

The 3rd Act is the Weakest and Suffers the Most from the Aforementioned Forced Change.

As it Becomes Confusing with Scenes and Dialog Becoming Hard-to-Follow with the Removal of Previous Items that would Make Things Make Sense.

There Are Chills and Shudders to be Had Despite the Troubled Production,.

As it Stands, it is Worth a Watch for Movie Fans in General and for Horror Fans a Must-See.

Of course, a two-hour film of paint drying would be better than EXORCIST II. EXORCIST III is better than a two-hour film of paint drying...marginally.

There are a few nice moments; the carp stuff is cute, and there are a couple of good eerie shots in the hospital. But ultimately, the movie collapses under the weight of a ludicrous and muddled plot, fairly awful performances (for which I blame the director; Scott would surely have done better if left to himself), and poor dialogue (notably Dourif's interminable monologue about how he possessed Karras's body, which could have been cut down to about five lines and been much more effective).

And speaking of Dourif, he should have been fired. Not for anything he did, but because once the studio had made its last-second decision to bring back Jason Miller, Dourif was superfluous. The character has Karras's body, it looks like Karras, why do we keep switching back and forth from Dourif to Miller to Dourif? Instead of rewriting the script, Blatty should have reshot all of Dourif's scenes with Miller in the role.

But I'm not sure how clearly Blatty was thinking while making this film (having never read LEGION, I'm not sure whether this logical slip occurs in the novel). Blatty uses the old trick of having the cops give out false details about crimes in order to distinguish a real confession from a false one. Kinderman comes to believe that current murders are being committed by the dead Gemini Killer because the killings have the look of the real Gemini murders, not the fake details which were printed in the papers.

However, we have already been informed that the Gemini Killer was executed. So the real details of the killings (which involve the mutilation of the bodies) would have come out in the trial. Remember the coroner in the OJ Simpson trial testifying in detail as to the condition of the bodies? Same deal.

So all a copycat killer would have had to do is read the trial transcripts--or even the news reports about the trial.

Blatty's final mistake (apart from making this film at all, of course) was to abandon the traditional, coherent Catholic theology which gave the original EXORCIST its extraordinary depth and power for a weird plot about one dead person possessing the body of another dead person (who apparently wasn't quite dead, because his soul is still inside his body, but who was dead enough that it took the first dead person [the one possessing, not the one possessed] fifteen years to repair the damage to his [the possessed person's] brain).

I am not looking forward to EXORCIST IV.

4/10

William Peter Blatty's The Excorcist III is my favourite in the series, and if that leaves some people aghast with disbelief, I'll still hold my stance. Don't get me wrong, the first film is a classic of atmospheric dread, the sequel is a psychedelic oddity that's also very underrated, but there's something about this one that just sat better with me than any of the others, including the two prequels with Stellen Skarsgard. This one deviates from the pattern as well as lifts the focus from Linda Blair's character, paving a cool new story for itself and breaking new ground. It's also got one of the single most terrifying moments I've ever seen on film, orchestrated perfectly enough to give a good dose of goosebumps to the strongest of spines. The immortal and always excellent George C. Scott plays Kinderman, a police lieutenant who is on the trail of a bloodthirsty serial murderer nicknamed The Gemini Killer. The killer himself has actually been long deceased, but uncanny similarities in the current crimes have freaked the police right out, and so he follows the clues to a foreboding psychiatric facility. It soon becomes clear that there's something very mysterious going on, and something very wrong with the patients. Skittish Dr. Temple (Scott Wilson) seems to know what's going on, but also seems not to, or to be too scared to divulge anything. A terrifying patient named James Venuman (Brad Dourif is so scary you'll want to hide behind the couch) seems to contain something malevolent inside him, his ravings making eerie sense to the detective. There's a few surprise cameos from veterans of the franchise, as well as work from Ed Flanders, Nicol Williamson and, believe it or not, an appearance from Fabio, of all people. The atmosphere is so thick you could choke on it, the dread hanging in the air like clammy mist, helped in part by the disturbing choice of location, Dourif's sheer ghoul act and cinematographer Gerry Fisher's camera, which lurks along walls and corridors and turns the facility into a haunted house, and our nerves into a jittering mess. Underrated as both a standalone fright flick and as an entry in the Excorcist series. Top notch creepfest.

"Exorcist III" has a strong anchor in George C. Scott (as Det. Kinderman, played by Lee J. Cobb in the original "Exorcist"), an actor who gives a better performance than this type of film deserves. He is given good support by Ed Flanders (as Father Dyer), Brad Dourif (as the reincarnated "Gemini Killer") and Jason Miller, as Dourif's incarcerated 'host.' William Peter Blatty, author of the original novel, takes the screen writing and directing credit, producing a film that is shockingly effective in its subtlety--this is not a horror film of jump-scares and slit throats, but of atmosphere, mood, and contemplative discussion. While this adaptation of Blatty's unrelated novel "Legion" crams in the exorcism angle to questionable effect, he creates a tight, suspenseful tale with a dash of surrealism (what is up with that "heaven" sequence with Fabio?)--"Exorcist III" is a strong film and a fine franchise entry (especially after John Boorman's lamentable "Exorcist II: The Heretic"), but don't expect projectile vomiting, crucifix masturbation, and the other shock effects of its predecessor.

The Exorcist III (1990)

*** 1/2 (out of 4)

Police Lieutenant Kinderman (George C. Scott) is investigating some brutal murders, which appear to be being committed by the Gemini Killer. The only problem is that the killer has been dead for fifteen-years, which sets it back to when the MacNeil girl was possessed by a demon and Father Karras was killed. Somehow Kinderman believes the two are connected and playing out in the current time.

Writer-director William Peter Blatty's THE EXORICIST II is like a lot of movies in the fact that it was handed over to the studio and they weren't happy with it so re-shoots were done. After all, if people are coming to see THE EXORCIST III shouldn't they get an exorcism? I will leave that up to each viewer whether or not the post-production changes actually worked but for my money not only is this the best sequel in the series but I think it's a strong contender for being the best movie. Yes, you heard me right. In many ways I think this film is even better than the first movie.

Blatty's novel Legion is the source for this and there's no question that this is an extremely well-made and well-acted thriller (not horror) that manages to be quite creepy throughout and also manages to have one of the greatest jump scares from any movie ever made. What makes the film work so well is that it's basically a police thriller that has a very good story dealing with a serial killer and a mystery possibly tying it to an exorcism from years earlier. I'm certainly not going to ruin any of the twists in the movie but for me they work extremely well.

Another thing that makes this film so great are the performances. Scott, filling in for Lee J. Cobb who had passed away, does a remarkable job and certainly helps sell the film. Scott was one of our most underrated character actors and he brings a lot to the film including making you believe everything that you're seeing. With someone like Scott in the picture it just gives the movie more credit just like THE OMEN got by having Gregory Peck in it. There's a wide range of emotions that Scott has to play but he certainly nails the character. Ed Flanders, Jason Miller and Nicol Williamson are all good as is Scott Wilson and Nancy Fish. Brad Dourif is also good here, although I think the scenes with him are the weakest in the film.

THE EXORCIST III features a great score, some terrific cinematography and as I said a convincing story that holds your attention throughout. People can debate on whether or not the exorcism at the end was needed but this here is certainly a very good thriller.

I recall watching this at around age 15 or so, and really not liking it. This was around the time I was more into slashers, like Freddy or Jason. This was just too slow for me. Fast forward thirty years, and it's a new appreciation. The pace just adds to the seriously dark atmosphere. Dourif was amazing, seriously underrated.

Being a gigantic fan of the original Exorcist and having read the review of this film and having seen the horrible Exorcist 2, I was very weary. So one night I rented this movie and was blown away. It's written and directed by William Peter Blatty, who wrote the original book and this book. He does an amazing thing with taking the lore of the original and having a murder mystery about the "Gemini" killer and joining them with a perfect balance. Acting is top notch and there are some very very creepy moments. I say that if you liked the original you will most likely like this, as long as you keep your mind open and don't expect a carbon copy of the original.

15 years after the events of the Regan McNeil exorcism, Lieutenant William "Bill" Kinderman (George C. Scott) and Father Joseph Dyer (Ed Flanders) have maintained a friendship as both still mourn the loss of mutual friend Damien Karras (Jason Miller). Kinderman investigates the brutal murder of a 12 year old boy he mentored with shared signs of infamous serial killer The Gemini Killer (Brad Dourif) who was executed 15 years ago. As Kinderman investigates similar murders that eventually even claim Father Dyer, he soon finds a connection back to that night 15 years ago.

The Exorcist III is a 1990 horror film written and directed by William Peter Blatty who authored the first Excorist book and film with this film based on his own novel Legion. Despite having no desire for a sequel, Blatty eventually had a change of heart and pitched his take on Exorcist III following the character of Lieutenant Kinderman. Despite Exorcist II having been a critical and commercial disappointment, Warner Bros. Was interested in making a third Exorcist film and even William Friedkin briefly considered returning to direct, but creative differences between Blatty and Friedkin lead to the film landing in development hell which led to Blatty turning the concept into a book which became a best seller. Eventually the film rights landed at Morgan Creek with Blatty set to adapt Legion and after Blatty tried to secure John Carpenter (with the two parting ways respectfully over creative disagreements) Blatty instead directed the film himself. With George C. Scott succeeding the character of Kinderman from Lee J. Cobb who had regrettably passed on, Blatty filmed Legion in 1989 on schedule and only slightly overbudget until Morgan Creek head James Robinson (on the advice of his secretary, seriously) insisted Blatty due a new effects heavy ending that including an exorcism. Blatty reluctantly complied and the character of Paul Morning was shoehorned into the movie via insert shots and ADR to fit the new climax. The film was a minor success in its day making $44 million against an $11 million and received mixed reviews while still improved from The Heretic. While undeniably a flawed movie, it's a valiant attempt to follow on to a classic.

With the movie taking the form primarily of an investigative procedural, the film has a real asset in George C. Scott as Bil Kinderman. How the Golden Raspberry Awards thought to nominate him for worst actor is absolutely flabbergasting because Scott gives a really strong performance in this film. While Scott has a slight acerbic delivery to the character in scenes where he shoots the breeze with Ed Flanders' Father Dyer, we also see a more vulnerable and human side of the character as a good man whose faith in the world is shaken by the horrors he's witnessed in his line of work. The movie is certainly a horror film (unlike The Heretic), but it doesn't feel like a repeat of the same material and creates a unique noirish approach to the material. The main antagonist of The Gemini Killer is really well portrayed and I unfortunately can't divulge more without spoiling it, but despite the logical leaps the movie needs to take to make this character work it ends up really well. The weakness unfortunately comes in the form of Father Paul Morning and the forced exorcism ending which seems to take Deus Ex Machina quite literally. The movie's done a slapdash job of including Nicol Williamson's Father Morning into the film down to the fact no characters ever speak his name or to him directly and despite scenes being included that "set him up" there's nothing to him and he's just a cog in Morgan Creek's machine to bring us to the Exorcism ending and it feels really forced.

When Exorcist III is good it's really good, but you can see Morgan Creek's studio notes oozing through the film unfortunately in a way that dampens and undermines some really strong character work. Still worth a viewing (I know there's a director's cut which I've not seen) especially for Scott's performance as Kinderman.

The Exorcist 3; the most underrated horror movie of all time! In 1990, the director William Peter Blatty released the Exorcist 3. The plot centres around Detective Kinderman (played by George C. Scott) and his friend Father Dyer ( Ed Flanders). The two meet up every year on the anniversary of the death of their friend Father Damien Karras and cheer themselves up by going to see a film called " It's a Wonderful Life " but this year is different, as there is a serial killer on the loose. The killer tortures his victims the very same way as a killer called the Gemini killer did, the only problem, he is supposed to be dead 15 years. The problem that the movie faced was in fact the fault of the two Exorcist movies that came before it, '1' and 2'. While Exorcist 3 was a master class in the thriller/ horror genre, people were expecting to see an 'in your face' horror movie with the same shocking visual effects they had seen in the first two. This film is a slow burner with not a drop of blood spilled, but don't let that fool anyone into a false sense of security, as the greatest trick this movie plays is on the mind, because it's not what you see but what you can't see which is the most frightening thing about this film. This film is a must see for any true horror film fan as the sense of evil lurking behind every scene is almost touchable as the plot unfolds, with one particular scene that is guaranteed to make the most hardened horror fan jump out of their seat.

WOW!!! Who would've known that the 3rd film in The Exorcist franchise would turn out to be so damn Awesome!!!

Of course the 70's Exorcist is a Classic or Masterpiece & part 2 is supposed to be trash? But part 3 is a fantastic Detective story full of creepy atmosphere & spooky imagery & freaky dream sequences & an incredible central performance from the legendary GEORGE C. SCOTT.

Now i had only ever seen the great veteran actor Scott in the scary, gritty & sad 70's Thriller " HardCore" & his performance in that seedy Thriller as a disturbed religious father lost in the grimy underworld of the Los Angeles porno scene trying to find his daughter was outstanding in my opinion. George was a brilliant actor that's a fact & made an impression on me in that creepy Thriller.

Here the great actor plays a bitter & angry Detective (another incredible performance) who is haunted by what he deals with everyday as a Cop. There's a sicko sadistic serial killer on the rampage & the deaths are horrific & symbolic with religious themes & the stress of these disturbing murders are getting too much for our hero Detective. Lieutenant Kinderman is a great character to follow on this dark & twisted demonic Mystery as he's an old guy that's full of Rage at a world that is so cruel. I really identified with Scott's character here & incredibly intense performance. Scott brings lots of intensity to the role & a hardness to the old bitter Lieutenant that just rings true.

The atmosphere here is fantastic with it's creepy rain drenched city & creepy hospital settings, especially the mental ward scenes & the whole movie has a polished Crime Thriller feel to it but with a supernatural Horror undertone that fits nicely into the religious Horror stuff of the first film. We see those famous steps from the first film & an atmosphere that reminded me of the Classic John Carpenter Horror "The Fog" & that's a huge compliment as i consider The Fog to be the greatest Horror movie ever made!!!

I'm so glad I've finally seen The Exorcist 3, it's a great film & i like it alot more than the dreary first film.

Scott's performance is so damn good here & you total believe in his hard character & understanding why he's the way he is. He says a fantastically true line in the movie to his old priest friend "The whole world is a murder victim" he means all the Death & Horror that happens constantly throughout the entire world!!! Damn he's right & damn he's a great movie Detective.

A fantastic Horror Thriller with Scott's undeniably brilliant performance that grounds all the religious demonic stuff.

One might imagine that, after the debacle that was The Exorcist II, the franchise would have returned to the head-spinning and vomit spewing of the original, but to writer/director William Peter Blatty's credit, he tries something a little different with The Exorcist III, his film's serial killer plotline more akin to The Silence of the Lambs for much of the time. The nearest the film comes to William Friedkin's 1973 classic is with the brief special effects laden exorcism scene in the final act, which was forced upon Blatty by the film's producers.

The majority of the film sees George C. Scott's cop Kinderman investigating several gruesome murders that mimic the modus operandi of The Gemini Killer, who was executed in the electric chair fifteen years earlier. Kinderman's enquiries lead him to cell eleven of a secure hospital ward where a patient who resembles dead priest Father Damien Karras claims that he is the Gemini Killer, having possessed Karras's body as he died.

Sadly, as original as the majority of this film is, it also proves frustratingly dull for much of the time, with a glut of exposition heavy dialogue, an extremely slow pace, and only one decent scare (the much lauded hospital hallway scene) to keep the viewer from nodding off. As out-of-place as the studio sanctioned exorcism undeniably is, at least it's entertaining, which is more than I can say about George C. Scott's character complaining about a carp in his bath.

William Peter Blatty The Exorcist III's has excellent dialogue, well paced, superb acting, solid character arcs and plot development mark this fine demonic horror/detective story. I feel George C. Scott's performance is as good as he has ever played in any of his previous films. Further back up by Brad Dourif magnetic monologue's . The atmosphere surrounding the film is one of foreboding , anticipation and ultimately the despair of satanism. May not have the visceral impact of the first film, but it gives viewers far more than they had any reason to expect. It would probably be much more highly-regarded were it not for the pedigree it has to live up to. Exorcist III stands alone, one of those rarest of birds: a horror sequel with ideas of its own.

You know you're in trouble when the box-art for the movie in your hands doesn't bare any rave-review quotes or snippets. Far be it from the discriminating viewer to judge a book (or DVD) by its cover, though, because while "The Exorcist III" looks like a subpar sequel to a classic film, the fact of the matter is that there is more to it than meets the eye. A film that is notorious for tinkering by the producers, despite being in the hands of "The Exorcist" creator William Peter Blatty, this third entry in the saga has more brains than the average 80's horror film and more weight than any sequel within the genre is ever expected to hold.

George C. Scott plays police lieutenant Kinderman (a character seen briefly in the first film), hardened but human, who is on the trail of a mysterious, sadistic and methodical killer who takes after the famed Gemini Killer (a take on the real-life Zodiac Killer), despite the fact that he has been dead for fifteen years. When a longtime friend in Father Dyer (Ed Flanders) emerges as the next victim, a chain of events unfolds that brings back a familiar face from the past in Father Karras (Jason Miller reprising his role from the first film). Bit by bit, what Kinderman unearths turns out to be bigger than himself and threatens his very existence.

Scott is reliable and likable as always in the role of Kinderman, and while Jason Miller isn't given much to do here, it's a pleasure to see him again. Brad Dourif, best known as Chucky in the "Child's Play" series, is the wild-card of the film and nearly threatens to steal the show in one of his most intense performances. The script, based off the Blatty's novel, "Legion," is hardly a re-hash of the first film, and compared to other sequels from its era, is quite a refreshing change of pace as an intelligent and classy picture in its own right. The gore and special effects are kept to a minimum, as the movie is just as much about its characters and dialogue as it is about its horrors.

The film's not without its faults, of course. Take the tacked-on ending that reeks of studio interference, for example. Blatty's battles with producer James G. Robinson (who had nothing to do with the original film in the first place) result in an intelligent horror movie/sequel that simply doesn't know how to end itself. It's as if someone was standing there saying: "This is fine and all, but we need an exorcism scene!" and voila! While it results in a rather gruesome and exciting special effects opportunity, the man-sticking-to-the-ceiling bit feels out of place with the tone of the rest of the film, which for the most part, keeps things cerebral and tasteful. This little bit felt like something you'd see in a "Hellraiser" flick, not that there's anything wrong with that. As for Patrick Ewing playing the Angel of Death in a dream sequence? Don't even get me started. Heck, even an appearance by Fabio seems bound and determined to rain on a decent parade.

In the end, "The Exorcist III" is a solid sequel that falls short of greatness. Its creativity and inventiveness is undermined by the insistence on re-introducing elements from the original film for nothing other than keeping with the namesake. Fans who felt themselves left in the cold by "The Exorcist II" will find this a treat, as will anyone else who loves an intelligent horror/thriller. Despite its flaws and the fact that it effectively killed off the franchise (was it ever meant to be?) "The Exorcist III" is as close to greatness as any of the sequels or prequels gets to the original.

A lot of people say it's a brainy horror movie and it's not for everyone and i couldn't agree more. It's definitely not for me and i assume a lot of fans of the horror genre wont like this either. It's more a crime/detective movie than a horror movie, it has no gore in it and only a few scares but mostly filled with people talking. The best horror movies out there don't try to be smart because there is no need and no audience for it. To be honest I think most people expect a horror movie to be bloody or scary and not solely clever. So with that all being said I think this movie misses all the ingredients a classic horror needs and all we are left with is a pretty boring mess.