Rating: 
Summary: A HERESY IN ITSELF OF THIS VERY AWFUL SEQUEL
Review: On August 6, everyone was going into DVD stores and running to get their copy of Lord of the Rings. Being the alien I am, I grabbed a copy of Exorcist II - The Heretic instead.When the film came out in June 1977, my mom went to see it with a friend and within twenty minutes, people were throwing things at the screen, yelling and booing and all walked out and demanded refunds. The theatre it was playing at never got so much outrage over a film in its history so the film was pulled out within 6 days. In saying this, I had to find out what all the fuss was about and after I saw the film, I could see why. First off, the script is very bad, the acting is poor and the film lacks any type of pace or conviction. This film could of had potential with the "big" actors who dropped in for this after affect of "exorcism", but this film was absolutely boring and I am sure William Peter Blatty and William Friedkin were laughing their heads off over this film. This film also broke the long time careers of the actors involved with the exception of Max Von Sydow and James Earl Jones who have been successful within thier own right. Linda Blair and Louise Fletcher, unfortunately went on to do such a line of B-movies, they were never big again. This film was moreless, the last film(s) for Richard Burton and Paul Henried, who died a few years later. This film concentrates on Father Lamont (Richard Burton) who is sent by the Cardinal (Paul Henried) to investigate the circumstances of the death of Father Merrin (Max Von Sydow), who died at the hands of Regan MacNiel (Linda Blair) during her exorcism from the original film. The story goes back and forth and then, becomes complicated in summary of a film that is surely beyond comprehension. Such a shame !! An awful sequel from beginning to end. As for the DVD, the picture quality was quite good for an awful film. The sound was good - was able to hear everything in the film, despite the fact it is presented in Mono. I was quite surprised by the Teaser Trailer which was quite good - to me, it strangely looked like the design of A Clockwork Orange. Also, the subtitles are presented in many different languages. I said to myself - would the Asian population like this film ?? Also, this film is the original theatrical version and there is an Alternate Opening Sequence which I did see before. The Menu Board was quite basic and the actual Theatrical Trailer speaks for itself. I will give Warner high marks for those little extras. Other than that, just one star from mois. For those who enjoyed this film, this DVD would be a have. For me, I like this film in a strange way because this film is so cheesy, it has Linda Blair, Nurse Ratched and that lush Richard Burton in it. Gotta get brushing with the wings as I feel the wind !!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Horrible sequel to a classic...
Review: First of all, THE EXORCIST is one of the best (and scariest) horror films ever made. So why did they make this horrible sequel that, 10 minutes into the movie, makes you fall asleep? It was probably an attempt to cash in on the success of the original. Do not believe the reviews that say this is better than the original-- because it just isn't. The only good thing about this turkey is the lavish set design, and seeing Linda Blair return as Regan, the possessed child from the original. Why Ms. Blair returned to star in this clunker is beyond me. All I want to know is-- why release this on DVD? There is just no point. When EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC was released back in 1977, audiences laughed this off the screen. Anyone who buys this film on DVD will probably throw it in the garbage-- because that is where it belongs! Though there are few good moments, some things stand out. The performances from Linda Blair and Louise Fletcher are noteworthy. And, as I mentioned before, the set design is awesome. There is no doubt that this terrible viewing experience will be given a great DVD transfer, which may make the film seem slightly better than it really is. But, those good things aside, EXORCIST II just fails miserably as a horror film. There is certainly NOTHING scary about it. And it is short in the plot department. There is really no logic or brains to this film. It just falls flat on it's face-- HARD.
Rating: 
Summary: Leave A Good Thing Alone!!!!
Review: Probably the biggest example of why sequels should not be made. Usually the sequel can never match the success of the original. Why is that? Well because it's been done once already. The Exorcist is probably the scariest movie of all time and one of my personal favorites. It has everything you could ask for in a horror movie, it's creepy, scary and it's the type of movie that will stay with you and will never forget. Even more than that The Exorcist had a great plot, fantastic direction and great acting. It goes above and beyond the typical horror movie. So why an Exorcist II? I'm still trying to answer that myself. It's really not that bad of a movie it's just that it's a definite let down from the original. You won't be satisfied with this film. It's tedious, acting is sub-par, the plot is shotty and most of all it's not scary. I wouldn't suggest buying the movie until you've viewed it first.
Rating: 
Summary: awsome!
Review: this movie was greaT IT IS SOOO UNDERATED YOU SHOULD BUY IT RIGHT NOW!
Rating: 
Summary: Its Good, However Somewhat Acted Out
Review: The Exorcist II:The Heretic is at some points acted out.But what movies arent? Is it as good as The Exorcist? No.But is it good? Yes. However LINDA BLAIR (Regan) refused to wear the make-up that she wore in the first original Exorcist. The story starts out in Africa with a young woman is posessed by the exact demon
Regan was posessed by in 1973. Then a priest Father Philip Lamont is sent to perform the exorcism. Unfortunately she is in so much pain she took candles and burned her. It was quite terrifying. Then the movie takes off to New York City, where Regan lives now with her childhood nanny Sharon (KITTY WINN).Then the story takes off whereas the prist Father Philip Lamont is asked to investigate the death of his old friend Father Lancaster Merrin (MAX Von SYDOW).THEN THE REST IS THE MAIN THEME AND LIKE THE CLIMAX! So I dont think I should tell you the rest.Comment to another reviwer:I saw a reveiwer of this movie say "I hate to think what the third one is like." Ive seen the third Exorcist it is excellent,great plot! Supurb Acting! Well I hope you agree with this review.
CAST:
Linda Blair As Regan
Kitty Winn As Sharon
Max Von Sydow As Ft.Merrin
Richard Burton As Ft.Lamont
Louise Fletcher As Gene Tuskin
Rating:
Summary: Not so good
Review: I really liked the Exorcist. In fact it's probably my favorite movie ever! But it's the kind of movie that doesn't need a sequel! That's probably why a lot of people don't like this movie. But I have a different reason for not liking it: IT WAS CORNY. I mean come on people. Did the people who made this movie think that it was good? Here's how the movie goes: Reagan is still traumatized by her exorcism so she sees a psychologist named Jean. Sweaty Father Lamont shows up to find information about Father Merrin (from the first film) but ends up staying to help Reagan fight the eee-ville (which is how he pronounces it) that's still inside of her. The rest of the movie is so corny you won't believe. They use a flashing light thing to hypnotize each other. Father Lamont takes a trip to Africa to find out about Father Merrin's previous exorcism. It takes away the scariness from the first movie. I thought she was possesed by the devil, you know, Satan. but it turns out she was possesed by an african demon Pezuzu. Pezuzu takes the form of a swarm of locusts (is that really scary?). Reagan is supposed to be 'the good locust' and that's why Pezuzu wants her. they go back to the house from the first movie and try to get rid of Pezuzu once and for all. The "special effects" really suck (well... what did you expect?) and some of the dialouge doesn't make sense. "If pezuzu comes for you, i will spit a leopard" What does that mean?? But I gave it 2 stars because Linda Blair looks good and I like the whole Exorcist thing. It wasn't scary, it wasn't exciting, but what can you do... it's a corny movie from the 70s. This movie does contain my favorite corny moment: James Earl Jones hawking out a cherry tomatoe onto a bed of spikes ! (it's funny to watch that part backwards) Check it out if you're really into the Exorcist or Linda Blair. ...
Rating:
Summary: Come on! This movie is a real flop!- By Izo
Review: "Exorcist II: The Heretic" didn't live up to the original. The hokey and tacky performances do this film no credit. Richard Burton plays a very false role of a priest. The role dosn't fit at all. Although there were some good moments the role just wasn't him. Its quite sad that a high class actor like Richard Burton came aross so weak. Louise Fletcher's role as a shrink is o.k. but within the circumstances at times it comes across like shes not a very experienced actress at all and yet again a poor performance from a talented human being. Such as her role in "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" thars the role you would expect to see. James Earl Jones I feel doesn't really get a good part in this although his role isn't that Bad. He is famous for being the powerful voice of "Darth Vader". Its just a shame that he didn't play a bigger part in the movie. Although his voice did shine through in a scene when he was talking to Burton about locusts. You still get that feeling that a high class actor is being portrayed in a role that doesn't live up or suites their own standards. Max Von Sydow was the actor that lived up to his role in the previous movie. But the poor film sets still produce a false atmosphere but some how Von Sydow seems to rise above this. So his role is way above average in this movie. It comes across much better than many of the other actors/ress's in the movie for the simple fact that it has not changed at all. Linda Blair puts on a not so good performance as the older "Regan". As she lacks many of the finer qualitys she had in the first movie. This brings on some over the top performances from her as she has mildly departed from her original role and character. So I think bringing her, Kitty Winn and Max Von Sydow was to hype the movie up a plan that failed. Kitty Winn's role is back from "The Exorcist" this character has changed so much you wouldn't believe what you are seeing. The role was a small part in the first this time its much bigger. She puts on a stale hard performance. Not the caring and worried character we saw in the original.To thumbs down! The movies plot was good and ambitious a could have gone much further. The acting in places did shine through on all the of the characters. But this sequal really never did live up to the power and strengh of the original. do not buy or rent this film unless like me. You would see the positive side of this movie. I just felt I had to be realistic about this movie and how its portrayed.
performance
Rating:
Summary: Bummer!
Review: John Boorman is a good film maker, who did a great job with Deliverance in 1974. When he tryed to take on part 2 of a very classic thriller he failed, and he had a alot to work with to. The Heretic is not scary at all and lacks the realism of the first Exorcist.
The film makers throw in some [strange] extra features that don't belong like a mind reading machine. I am still trying to decide if I want to watch the third one yet or not.
Rating: 
Summary: A better film than I expected!
Review: I'm a huge fan of the original film,and this 1977 sequel was not acceptable to fans.I'd long heard that this movie was worse than awful,so I'd avoided it like the plague.Goes to show you that you should decide stuff for yourself,because I LIKE this movie!If you're gonna make a sequel,make a sequel,don't rehash the first movie!This movie continues the story of Regan's condition.Is she cured?Is Satan real?Can a heretical priest help her?Interesting ideas and creepy images abound.C'mon,you didn't really want a mere rehash of the first film,did ya?I'm glad it's not.......
Rating:
Summary: 'The Heretic' is not that bad people!
Review: When 'Exorcist II: The Heretic' first came out in theaters, it was a flop. I was not actually alive in 1977 so I don't know what 8 minutes John Boorman edited out of the film. I agree that it is ridiculous that the MPAA idiots would rate this 'R'. It is HARDLY even remotely scary so it should be rated at least PG-13. The critics expected a horror movie. When they found that it was actually ScienceFiction, they called it a flop. The movie isn't that bad, it's just different from the first movie. Linda Blair absolutely hated her role in the Exorcist. Not only did she have to say very explicit offensive remarks, but she was not credited as a major star of the movie. But when they dangled the fame of being the major role of a movie in front of her chubby face, she was like 'Hell,yeah!' So that is how Linda got stuck playing a bad role. Exorcist 2 features scenes that supposedly happened while Damien had left the room. Regan and Merrin have a short conversation stating that "He's mine always". I have no idea who "He" is. And strangely, after watching Exorcist 1, I saw that Merrin died on the left side on the bed. In Exorcist 2, he dies at the south end of the bed. The so called "possesed Regan" in Exorcist 2 looks much older than the original. I also find it strange that Regan happens to be scrounging her hand over the pshychiatrist the same time that Satan is, in the same spot. What a coincedence. Well I suggest this to fans of Return From Witch Mountain, Twilight Zone, and other hypnosis/sci-fi-related movies.
| 
