The Exorcist III (1990)

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

How sad is this?

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

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, leads him to question the patients of a psychiatric ward. The Exorcist III is nowhere near as good as the first plus it's way different than both of them as a whole and definitely better than the 2nd one. The film's acting was brilliant and it was more of a psychological thriller than a horror movie and Brad Dourif's perfomance was damn stunning. Definitely a very underrated sequel. (8/10)

User "Raegan Butcher" in the user reviews: "I once heard it remarked that director William Peter Blatty directs like David Lynch--but with a tighter pace! Not a bad estimation, I'd say." Directs like David Lycnh? This Blatty guy had directed ONE movie before this one and to date he has directed only one movie after this.This user also called this movie "the best horror movie in twenty years." I highly doubt that 10/10 scoring he gave this movie. It's a sad thing IMDb is being used for advertising and promoting as well as for zionistic propaganda etc.Another user, "Bladecatcher" gave this 9/10.The user called this movie "the best Exorcist sequel". So, this is better than "Exorcist 2"? Big deal.Some of the best movie I've ever seen only reach to an average score of 4–5 and on the other hand zionistic, semi-fictional BS propaganda such as "Band of Brothers" get 9.5! Well, we all know that you can buy followers, re-tweeters and "likes" from India or China $1 a piece.

The Exorcist III isn't nearly as brilliant as the first movie, but compare it to the sequel, it's a masterpiece. This is what I call sluggish film that you'll need a lot of patience to get to the good stuff. Well, the whole movie is kind of like that. Every time I think something is going to progress with the story it jumps right back. Luckily it doesn't do that too often and it's only for build up (i guess).But it's not to say that "The Exorcist III" doesn't have it's scary parts, because it really dose. There's moments that are so eerie and quite shocking that the movie quickly cuts away to next scene so you don't even have a reaction or a thought of what you just seen. The movie takes a few minutes of silence as the scene plays on and then BOOM! And this actually did get to me. A great example of this is the Nurse scene which is one of the scariest scenes in movie history. During the scene you really don't get a sense of damage, but more of a safe feeling as every thing seems to be alright, until the horror kicks in. And I know that sounds very similar to every horror movie that use it's scars, but I think those movies get it completely wrong of how to make the build up and the scare executed in a way that it's effective. I think this is something that's missing in horror today.Brad Douriff is in this movie playing The Gemini killer and he's freaking amazing. This is one of the best performances I've seen from Douriff and it just proves of how talented this guy truly is. I would go as far to say it's Oscar worthy and he isn't in the movie that much. He's so creepy and frightening that he steals the show.But the actor that I thought was going to steal the show was George C. Scott, which is sadly not the case. He's a great actor and he was excellent in "Patton", but I found he's performance in this to be a bit over the top. I mean, I don't think he was RAZZIE worthy bad or anything, but he over reacted in the wrong parts. It came off a bit laughable. It's until the very end when he gets to shine as he's really giving it he's all. I give him that.The interesting thing I found out about the movie (after i finished watching it) was that the author of the book William Peter Blatty wrote & directed this. You know when you hear people complaint that when a movie adaptation isn't as accurate to the novel it's based on. Well, it's kinda refreshing (to me) for an author to make the movie that he wanted to see. And I can say that he exceed in a few parts even if the whole thing feels a bit disjointed, and that goes to the writing.Overall rating: "The Exorcist III" while not great, but at least gets back to it's roots of having a dark and unsettling atmosphere, something that was missing in "Exorcist II". The movie is honestly worth watching just for Brad Douriff performance.

The Exorcist III is simply one of those underrated gyms that get overlooked because of the abundant amount of sequels pumped out from money grabbing movie makers. So what is the primary reason why the Exorcist III surpassed the second installment by far? It's all because William Peter Blatty wrote and directed a film sequel to his original novel made into a screenplay. The film brought back the hard hitting grotesque dialogue and most importantly the scare factor. Blatty shot the film to tend towards the psychological horror aspects but he added a scare factor that brought tense, jumpy scenes. The film is often accredited to having one of the scariest movie moments that absolutely no one saw coming.Along with the phenomenal writing, direction and filmmaking there were some great characters portrayed with adequate acting. George C. Scott as the main protagonist did a good job and Brad Dourif was a nice touch, however parts of the supporting cast weren't all that great. The cameo list is impressive and very odd, I won't spoil a couple of them but to show how strange some are to the film, an example is Patrick Ewing as The Angel of Death. There are some other curious, questionable aspects about Exorcist III but it stands out to being a formidable entry the possession genre and an excellent crime thriller.