Rating: 
Summary: oh boy, is this bad
Review: This movie sucks. I was so excited to watch it, because the first exorcist scared me silly. But I was dissapointed with this.Why didn't Billy Friedkin direct? How come the original father Dyer didn't reprise HIS role? Why didn't the original Kinderman reprise his role? I hated George C. Scott. And why didn't the movie stay true to Bill Blatty's original novel "Legion"? How come Linda Blair didn't come back? What ever happened to Regan? George C. Scott shouted too much and exploded whenever one of the nurses made him mad. I laughed at his performance. This movie is a turkey, and i'm going to sell my DVD used to one of my friends or something like that.
Rating: 
Summary: A Very Mixed Bag: Some Good Bits, Some Weak Bits
Review: This movie centres on Bill Kinderman, the amiable cop who features in the original movie (but replacing Lee J. Cobb with George C. Scott.) It's fifteen years after the strange events at the McNeil house. Fifteen years too after the execution of the insane "Gemini Killer". But now there is a new series of gruesome murders, one that recalls the Gemini killings. And something very strange is going on: the fingerprints from these new crimes fail to match up, suggesting that they are not the work of a single killer. And there is someone a bit queer and unpleasant in Room 11 of the high security disturbed ward down at the hospital, someone who looks remarkably like the supposedly late Damien Karras, who before his supposed death was a longstanding close friend of Kinderman's. (Actually it's clear enough from the first movie that he was no such thing, just one of a number of out and out inconsistencies between 1 and 3 that seem faintly surprising given Blatty's authorship of both.) This time indeed Blatty is auteur as well as author, taking over as director from Friedkin. He's not too bad for a beginner and can certainly do suspense. But there's a general sense of a writer being let off the leash and being a trifle self-indulgent. It's certainly all a bit too self-consciously literary for a horror movie. Thus in the first 15 minutes or so: we have a conversation between Kinderman and his police colleagues that is, for cop-talk, rather improbably peppered with allusions to 'MacBeth', 'Lord Jim' etc., as if Blatty were just desperate to show us, through Kinderman, just what an educated fellow he is; we have an, again rather self-consciously literary, visit to the realms of Kinderman's neuroses as he expands to his friend Father Dyer (Ed Flanders) about his terror of the carp back home in his bathtub; and we have a long conversation between Kinderman and Dyer about the Problem of Evil. Then, just as we are about to get really cross with Blatty, we have a dark and violent scene in a confessional box which is one of the most splendidly creepy and disturbing scenes in any modern American horror movie. Things seem to be looking up... This mixture of occasional inspiration and a certain flatfootedness characterizes the whole film. Generally, it's a nice effective scary movie, though it's marred by some very significant flaws. (So it really is a battle between good and evil!) We could start with the title. There are more imaginative ways of naming sequels than simply II, III, etc. And 'Exorcist III' suggests that we are getting a sequel to 'Exorcist II'. Which happily we are not, as Blatty wisely simply ignores that rather silly (even by John Boorman standards!) film. Indeed I suspect he should have eschewed not only the 'III' but the 'Exorcist'. The connections with the earlier film are really pretty tenuous and contrived and Blatty would almost certainly have made a better (if less easily marketed!) film just by making this a free-standing new story. All this really has almost nothing to do with Regan McNeil and everything to do with the Gemini Killer. And indeed the determination to tie these things together leads to a certain absurdity as Karras's possession starts to seem a bit overdetermined: he seems to be possessed by the Gemini who is in turn possessed by the Demon from the first movie; metapossessed, as it were! And the Gemini seems not to be all that possessed, speaking very much in his own voice, far from buried like Regan before and Karras now, under the demonic persona. And why has the Demon bothered to possess Karras this complicated way dragging in this third party? We are told he wants to have revenge on Karras by having his body possessed by someone truly evil. But that explains nothing: as if the Demon wasn't evil enough in his own right. All this is just necessarily untidy. Then the scenes in the second half in room 11 where the Demon is faced down were presumably intended to recreate all the disturbing intensity of the parallel scenes in Regan's bedroom in EI. Which they don't: they are the lest effective part of the film. Partly again, this is Blatty getting carried away. Brad Dourif's Gemini is way too verbal; he explains himself far too much - unlike the original demon who explained nothing - and he ends up becoming unmysterious, not terribly scary and something of a bore. Indeed this general literary over-doing it remains pervasive: the Demon, on his very first appearance, has, quite unnecessarily, to quote a dirty great chunk of Donne at us. If these scenes are the weakest bits, the strongest are mainly to be found in the first hour or so and far away from the fateful room 11. In this movie, the Demon is mobile, has found a way to get out and about, and consequently Blatty tries to convey in many of these early scenes a disturbing sense of unseen malign presence. This he does with great success and genuinely creepy results. Which makes this, at least some of the time, an interesting and worthwhile horror movie, even if, ultimately, it's more a movie with some great moments than anything like a great movie.
Rating: 
Summary: LEGION A MOVIE GREAT ON ITS OWN TERMS!
Review: To start off with, this movie should have been called " Legion " not " Exorcist 3 "; obviously, Mr. William Peter Blatty { in a director debut nothing short of astonishing } was under some studio pressure to sell the movie as a sequel to attract mviegoers. " Legion " is a continuation of Det. Kinderman---played wonderfully and world weary by the magnificant George C. Scott---dealing with grisly murders that AT FIRST appear to be the work of a copycat of the ruthless and evil " Gemmini Killer "
James Venemin. But later on Kinderman gets more than he ever bargined for: following the murder of his friend Father Dyer who is admitted into a hospital { a gruesome one that appears to be the work of the killer Kinderman is after }, the detective is blown away to find in a " isolation tank " in the psyche ward of the hospital...Father Karras! But Father Karras is claiming to be James Venimen , who appears often to the viewer as a particular psychopathic Brad Douriff { who is iddeally evil here playing the role with satanic glee }! This movie contains very little gore; is thought provoking, atmospheric and VERY scary. And seeing the " Exorcist " s 1 or 2 is completly uneccesary to understand it and to enjoy this movie which deals with the evils of Man, as one reviewer said befor, the silence of God, demons both figuritively and literly, and most compelling, Kinderman's stuggling faith. Kaenan James
Rating:
Summary: Intense suspense movie, like Silence of the Lambs
Review: I saw this movie in the theater during its short run, and it blew my mind. Although it's connected to the original Exorcist (Blatty ignores the horrible Exorcist 2), the movie has a completely different feel. It's closer to Silence of the Lambs: it's a serial killer movie, with an mysterious and omniscient prisoner who is consulted for clues. You do not need to see the original Exorcist to understand this movie. The main characters are fleshed out: we see details of their lives which make us care about them. The detective Kinderman, for example, is not the chiche hardened cop. He is dealing with his mother in law living in the house, who is keeping a carp in the bathtub. His priest friend tells him that he is addicted to lemon drops, which he sucks on to cover the marijuana smell from some of the people he works with. The movie is dark and psychologically disturbing, with minimal gore. The serial killer must be the most demented ever thought up. There is a scene that is so scary that I think the whole theater jumped. The DVD goes for about $10 (cheap!) from Amazon and has minimal extras. I bought it and was thoroughly entertained seeing it a second time. I highly recommend it.
Rating: 
Summary: Worth renting...not sure about buying.
Review: Oddly paced (slow beginning)
Confusing/inexplicable sequencing and dialogue
Good picture and sound
no extras other than the trailer
NO SUBTITLES
More in the style of Silence of the Lamb than the original Exorcist.
Worth renting...not sure about buying.
Not good enough to be a classic.
Without George C. Scott, definately not worth watching.
Rating:
Summary: The power of Christ compels you to NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE
Review: The first Exorcist movie was great, but this movie, if one might call it that, is terrible. No plot, bad sequencing, bad camerawork, bad acting (minus Scott), gratuitous exorcisms, horrendously ill-conceived religious symbolism, horrendously ill-conceived grandmother-as-comic-relief character -- the list goes on. The "I believe" speech was overdone and overdramatic, and believing in the bad is misguided, anyway. Third time was not the charm; this one should have stayed on the cutting room floor. Obviously, they did not eat their Shredded Wheat.
Rating: 
Summary: Flawed yet fascinating continuation of the Exorcist story.
Review: Exorcist writer William Peter Blatty adapted his novel Legion, an honest attempt to further study the nature of faith as well as good and evil, and, thankfully, he managed to capture some of the novel's powerful concept. There is also several good seat jumping moments sprinkled throughout what is essentially a character driven story. Until the end, when the special effect exorcism takes over. That part isn't in the book, if I'm recalling it correctly, and it cheapens the over all feel of the movie. Nonetheless, this is an intelligent thriller that wants to do more than just shock and scare you. Highly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: The Devil's Blitzkrieg!
Review: Let's break out the Holy Water and crucifix, don our sacred vestments, run through the Liturgy of Exorcism, and get medieval on "Exorcist 3: Legion": is this a movie worthy of carrying the mantle of what many call the scariest movie ever made, or does it cry out to be exorcised of cinematic mediocrity? Fear not: "Exorcist 3" is a lush and haunting creepshow that boasts original "Exorcist" author William Peter Blatty in the director's chair, crisp cinematography by Gerry Fisher ("Highlander", "Wolfen"), and a spooky score that knows when to get low-key. Add to that George C. Scott in the role of Detective Lt. Bill Kinderman, a crusty cinephile brought back to those wickedly steep Georgetown steps when a serial killer slaughters and mutilates two priests and a young boy---brutal killings that are particularly baffling when police recognize the brutal signature of the infamous Gemini Killer---but the Killer died 15 years ago, and the fingerprints suggest the murders were carried out by three separate killers. Blatty's direction and a fine ensemble cast makes "Exorcist 3" a worthy successor to the original which manages to bury the silliness of "Exorcist2", and best of all the film ratchets up the terror. "Exorcist3" is not afraid to take chances, and while not the grand opera that Friedkin's original is, for my money it is far more terrifying and infinitely creepier. This time the Devil is finished messing around with random adolescents and has decided instead to launch a blitzkrieg against the morally weak and feeble minded. The mixture of forensic weirdness and supernatural strangeness brings Kinderman back together with old friend Father Dyer (the society priest from the original, now contrite and played effectively by Ed Flanders), and by the time the credits roll even Father Damien Karras has put in an appearance, joining Old Scratch to make "Exorcist 3: Legion" a reunion of sorts! "Exorcist 3" is monstrously entertaining and genuinely scary. Blatty has a remarkable flair for taking his well-crafted set-pieces and milking them for every ounce of spooky atmosphere: from Kinderman's audience in a Bishop's shadowy office, to the antiseptic cell-block housing a mysterious lunatic, to a hospital wing which features one of the most terrifying sequences in movie history, Blatty is in total control of his medium, using sound effects, actors' faces, and the film's lurking and creepy soundtrack to crank up the terror. And you get so many other fine little nuggets here, including: a typically tasty turn by the great Brad Dourif as the Gemini Killer; cameos by Fabio Volpe, Samuel L. Jackson, and even former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop; Colleen Dewhurst as the strangled voice of Satan; and a painful scene in which a Catholic priest is turned into a human refrigerator magnet. Ouch! Like its worthy predecessor "The Exorcist", "Exorcist 3" is a superbly directed spookshow about modern men wrestling with the silence of God, mortal terror, and the problem of Evil. But unlike Friedkin's original, Blatty seems less concerned with bile and gore, and far more interested in figuring out what happens when Man stares too long into the face of Evil. There are fates worse than Death.
Rating:
Summary: The REAL sequel to The Exorcist truly scares!
Review: William Peter Blatty wrote a book called The Exorcist, which was published in 1971 and quickly became a best seller of historic proportions. Never before had the public read such horrible and sexually explicit material - and about a child possessed by the devil. Hollywood quickly optioned the book, and the result was the William Friedkin directed masterpiece, "The Exoricst." The film went on to win critical and popular acclaim. In the theater, people fainted and vomited as a result of the horrors they saw on the screen. Because of a scene in the film, a new color was named: Linda Blair green (the young actress who portrayed the possessed child). The film became so wildly successful that for a time it had the distinction of having the most successful boxoffice of any film in history. It was only a matter of time before Hollywood cranked out a sequel. The result was "The Exorcist II: The Heretic". This film was created completely by screenwriters and producers with an eye for dollars and with no attention to the subject matter. Most of the principle actors from the first film passed this time around and those that remained were sorry they had. The Exorcist II: The Heretic is often thought of as one of the worst films in history. While Hollywood was screwing around with characters he had created, William Peter Blatty was busy writing the real sequel to his original book. It was called "Legion" (some places called it The Exorcist III, but since it was a book sequel, this is incorrect). Hollywood then optioned this film, and Blatty held firm and decided that he would make the movie himself, to protect his property. He was right to have done so. The film: The Exorcist III: Legion, is a tight, psychological thriller that picks up a few years after the events of the original book (and the original movie). Regan is gone and the film centers on Detective Kinderman (George C. Scott). He has the dubious task of dealing with a serial killer who is mimicking an executed serial killer with precision that only the real killer could know. Kinderman soon discovers that a mysterious patient in the criminal ward of the insane asylum may hold the secret to who is really killing these people. What happens next is nothing short of amazing. It further ties this film to the first and the characters as well. This movie is big on mood, lighting, visuals, and character. In short, it's really quite good. It's never very gory, though many gory things take place - just off screen. Some of the most frightening scenes that take place are filled with utter silence on screen and in the most docile of places. You will find yourself jumping and squealing as events unfold before you. This is a very well crafted horror film. I encourage you to take a look at this film and forget that there ever was an Exorcist II: The Heretic. The Exorcist III: Legion is the real owner of that title.
Rating:
Summary: Perhaps the most underrated sequel of all time
Review: I'll be honest, I had ZERO expectations for this film. The second film the series was perhaps the most God awful film I've had the displeasure of sitting through. Then when this one came to theaters, it bombed both critcally and financially. Now, with the fourth one on the horizon, I thought I'd go back and catch up by watching this one. I have to say, I was totally taken aback after viewing this film. It was the first film to give me the chills in over fifteen years (and I've sat through more horror films than most die hard horror fans).
One scene in particular (one I wouldn't dream of giving away), completely caught me off guard with it's use of subtlety and eerie sound effects. There is little on screen gore, as William Peter Blatty (writer/director) has his characters describe everything in great detail through the dialouge. This leaves most of it to your imagination, which tends to be more horrific in the long run. Save for a few really chilling close ups, the direction is pretty straight forward. Most of it is of the point and shoot variety, which really disarms the viewer when Blatty decides to lay on the scares.
The acting also suprised me with George C. Scott turning in an emotional performance (slightly over played, but that's always been his style). The real show stopper would have to be Brad ("Child's Play")Dourif, playing yet another psychopath with his usual brilliance. The interplay between him and Scott in the cell room came across very shudder-some. It reminded me of the scenes with Foster and Hopkins in "Silence of the Lambs" (though one should point out this predated "Silence" by a year!).
If I have any complaints, I suppose the climax would have to be it. It's as if someone else came in and shot a different ending (which may the case for all I know). It feels like your suddenly watching someone else's film right at the most crucial moment. The other complaint would have to be the presentation on the DVD itself. The picture is a little hazy and it's pretty much a "bare bones" package, with no real special features.
That aside, this film is a definate must see for all those horror and mystery buffs who may have overlooked this gem back when it was first released. Very smart thriller, which probably would've done better had it been released under the title "Legion" (the novel which it was based on, also written by Blatty), than as the third in the "Exorcist" series. Don't get me wrong, this is a great follow up to "The Exorcist" and really the only sequel I would consider to it. But the film stands well on it's own and it's a shame so few ever gave it the time of day becuase of it's roman numeral in the title.
| 
