A woman cautiously, like a fly, crawls along the ceiling. More and more victims die at the hands of a killer who died years ago. Flames rise, snakes crawl, and the earth opens, revealing the writhing bodies of the damned. Evil returns.

4k movies reviews
In addition to his invisible work as a literary corrector, William Peter Blatty was known for writing a number of screenplays, which have been adapted into films and even gained a certain amount of popularity. However, the writer’s obsessive desire to create in the genre of unpretentious comedy once turned against him and he found himself unclaimed. Instead of adapting to the new trends of the era, Blatty was left out of the game, taking casual earnings and publishing controversial books that are incredibly difficult to credit him with. Still, his lingering inspiration was not about to let him go, reminding him of an incident in the past when a highly publicized exorcism took place at Georgetown University. Figuring that an audience frightened by the anxieties of the Cold War and other social and political turmoil would also be interested in a story of dignitaries confronting demonic forces right alongside the calm of society, Blatty set to work. Realizing that the upcoming ‘The Devil’s Exorcist was essentially his last chance to hop on the elusive train of fame and universal acclaim, Blatty took his time writing, stretching the elaboration of the idea for many years. It was worth it, however. Once it saw the light of day, The Exorcist sold thousands of copies in America, and then conquered the rest of the world. It seemed that all forgotten and simply unnecessary writer and screenwriter jumped to the highest step of the pedestal, but his true recognition was ahead.

In 1973, William Friedkin, director of the brilliant thriller The French Connection, took on the screen adaptation of The Exorcist, with a clear focus on recreating a mystical nightmare with all the attendant details. Friedkin was not afraid that he could be condemned for excessive cruelty, and almost admiration for the nightmarish acts of demonic forces, and built the picture in accordance with its unique vision. Friedkina’s enthusiastic approach to the subject was bound to impress critics and audiences, with The Exorcist easily topping the list of highest-grossing horror films of all time, trailing only Anders Musketti’s It, which debuted a few decades later. But Friedkin’s box-office performance speaks only in part to the true artistic power of the film. Never have demons roamed the screens with such a spiteful look, thereby scaring even the most steadfast spectators, recklessly thinking that in their lifetime they have seen everything that could be. By bringing all the otherworldly gloom into one, Friedkin did Blatty an invaluable service, after which the writer’s career soared to the heavens and did not think of coming down. Blatty himself was in no hurry to please readers with his next creations, very carefully relating to the work. And though a completely unprepared sequel to ‘The Exorcist’ by John Boorman disappointed most of the fans of Friedkin’s film and Blatty’s novel, the author himself did not suffer, and even began to write a sequel to his novel, called ‘Legion’. The book has received mostly positive, albeit not rave reviews from readers and literary snobs, but it did not prevent it from being adapted into a movie titled ‘The Exorcist 3′.

The plot unfolds more than ten years after the last manifestations of the demon Pazuzu and introduces us to Lieutenant William Kinderman (George C. Scott), who has to investigate the gruesome murder of a 12-year-old boy. Seriously confused by the atrocity he sees, Kinderman enlists the help of a good friend, Father Dyer (Ed Flenders), but his help does no good, as the crimes continue and it is not easy to explain their logic. Trying to delve down to the very bottom of the investigation, Kinderman recalls long ago events that put the whole town on its ear. The capture of the inadequate maniac Gemini (Brad Dourif) revealed his diabolical trade in all its glory. The relatives of the maniac’s many victims were happy that the police had finally served their purpose and the judge had sent Gemini to the afterlife. And now, years after the killer was forgotten, signs of his deeds have returned to Georgetown and something must be done about them. The investigation leads the detective to the local mental hospital, where the doctors assure him there is a suspicious gentleman, Patient X (Jason Miller), who believes he is Gemini. A closer look, however, reveals the facial features of Carras’ father, presumably killed in an encounter with Pazuzu, who has inhabited the body of the unfortunate girl Regan McNeil.

Following the well-known saying ‘If you want something done well, do it yourself’, William Peter Blatty himself headed the shooting, having also authored a screenplay based on his own book. As you know, the second part of ‘The Exorcist’ was written from scratch and did not have Blatty’s original source material at its core, so the threequel can in part be considered a true sequel to the original film, although it has no strong ties to the story of the demon Pazuzu. Blatty took some important details from his ‘Exorcising the Devil,’ performing the mystery detective ‘Legion’ from it. And when it came time for the film adaptation, he personally reworked the book, tweaking some of the plot revelations so that viewers would have no doubt that ‘The Exorcist of the Devil’ was revealed before their eyes and not some fake, as was the case with the John Boorman picture. No doubt Blatty could not exploit Pazuzu’s potential once again, otherwise the story would have taken on the features of an outright farce in the style of the later seasons of ‘Supernatural’, and yet the omnipresent demon played its key role in Gemini’s biography, which served as the catalyst for the main action of the third film.

Although Blatty’s experience as a director was not substantial, he managed to make a studious and beautiful film, not devoid of silliness and rough edges, which, however, did not reflect in the worst way on the artistic merit of the production. In some places ‘The Exorcist 3′ is quite frightening, sometimes it manages to intrigue and captivate. Also on the merits of Blatty can be attributed the fact that he is not trying to openly speculate on his own novel, trying to present something new, original and unpredictable. The story once again finds a place for Carras’ father, once played by Jason Miller. For fans of the series it was incredibly nice to see an old acquaintance in action. Especially since after the events of the first ‘The Exorcist’ few people expected the return of this character. And it’s worth noting, his appearance in the plot lends itself to a logical conclusion. Blatty brought him back for a reason and spun a pretty good intrigue, keeping us in suspense every time the father glares his eyes at the camera preparing to do something frightening.

In the end, I want to say that ‘The Exorcist 3’ is in every way superior to the faded sequel, but it will never be on a par with William Friedkin’s picture. William Blatty really tried, it is noticeable throughout the entire production. And though he was far from always able to reach a diligent level, he is forgiven for his many shortcomings. We have seen the author’s work, screened by himself, and I can only wish you an intense viewing experience.

Info Blu-ray
Video
Codec: HEVC / H.265 (85.0 Mb/s)
Resolution: Native 4K (2160p)
HDR: Dolby Vision, HDR10
Aspect ratio: 1.85:1
Original aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Audio
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (48kHz, 24-bit)
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 2.0 (48kHz, 24-bit)
English: Dolby Digital 5.1

Subtitles
English, English SDH.