the audience applauded

Just what I expected

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Good movie, great story but terrible special effects

If you look this film up, you can read a wealth of information about how terrible the initial reviews were for it. It was re-released under 'Exorcist: The Beginning' which was essentially just a different edit and a desperate attempt to salvage the whole project. If you're a fan of the original 'The Exorcist' don't feel drawn towards this film as the two are unrelated. In fact, William Peter Blatty, the author/screenwriter of it, said that watching Exorcist: The Beginning was his "most humiliating professional experience." I love horror films and am totally open to anything low budget or a little odd. This is both with dire acting, scripting and special effects. I'm surprised it managed to reach the vote it did on IMDb and can only presume there are some very vocal die-hard fans out there. The film is poor in almost every way imaginable and my sincere advice, avoid like the plague!

Father Merrin assists a team of archaeologists who unearth a church. At first, Merrin resists the idea that supernatural forces are in play but an encounter with a demon inside a boy may change his mind.Dominion is the Prequel to the Exorcist (1973), the story is engaging, however like Harlin's Exorcist: The Beginning it's doesn't capture the tone of the Exorcist and feels more like a TV movie.The story of Dominion is very interesting, probably more so that the above mentioned Harlin's version but isn't as technically pleasing. It just can't getaway from that television look, the script is clunky, the sets are not dressed very well and the lighting is poor. The acting is more theatrical and the lack subtle cuts make it feel a far smaller film.Opening scene of the film is certainly very effective as Merrin faces the Nazi's. Nevertheless, it does have other faults especially the CGI effects. However, Ralph Brown as Sergeant Major is very good (and his screen time is sadly limited in Harlin's version).It works more as psychological horror but there are too many distractions to engross you, again like 'The Beginning' what makes this film interesting is the fact there are two films that utilise much of the same story, sets and actors. Watch only as an exercise.

I've wanted to see this since I found out Paul Schrader was directing, he's a fantastic director in his own right and one of the great screenwriters of all time. I was so disappointed when news started to filter out that there were issues, that the studio didn't think it was marketable, and then all of a sudden, the director sacked and the hack Harlin brought in. Being a huge Exorcist fan I saw the abomination that was "The Beginning", it was on a par with Sommers Van Helsing, in stupidity and unnecessary gore, the original Exorcist didn't rely on special effects, it was psychological it got under your skin, especially if you had any faith. I'm glad to say that Schraders version fits snuggly next to Friedkins original, it takes its time in the setup, it creeps under your skin with a swelling sense of dread that something is wrong with this place. The acting across the board is top notch, understated and believable. The effects let some of the scenes down but after reading that the director was only given $35,000 for post production, I'd say he did a bloody good job with what he was given. This film was never going to be a box office smash, times have changed, but it would have been successful, with it finding a DVD audience as well, if this could have been completed with proper post production and promotion of the film. It's respectful to the original film and its audience, not everything needs to be displayed on screen, the imagination is a far scarier place if manipulated correctly, the new breed of horror directors seem to forget this and paint by numbers.