If you're gonna compare this to the original than you're not looking at it the right way. This film actually tried to make to take the story and place it in a plausible future that gives way to multiple possibilities. There's elements of the original that are noticeable like hints of the cinematography, the musical tones and callback lines but this movie is a story about the father facing his past and coming to terms with the decisions he's made. I get how it's not super scary but realistically in this day and age, horror has a hard time delivering shock to its audiences. This isn't the 70's. People aren't going to have the same kind of reaction as they did back then. Everyone was expecting this to be as reactionary as the first and were given another film that's about demonic possession which are a dime a dozen now but I think people over time will realize this film isn't as bad as they thought. If it were called anything other than Exorcist it may have had a better chance and people would have enjoyed it more and seen as pretty solid film rather than a poor shot at revitalizing a classic film. I urge anyone who sees it don't be thinking that the original did this scene better or this was more scary. Try to see if the story on its own has some worth and maybe the sprinklings of the original tonalities will make it seem like a good nod to a once great horror instead of a failure towards one.
Review of The Exorcist: Believer
