To my mind Excalibur is one of the greatest films of all time. I saw it many times in my childhood, I watched it again recently - and I absolutely love it.
I just heard that and looked down in the comments ready to say the same thing! Such a dig at Sorcerer is a more important topic to address from this guy's message. Jade, on the other hand, is a high crime against cinema...
Excalibur is a seminal movie and the finest treatment of the King Arthur legend in existence. The Tailor of Panama is one of the better John Le Carre adaptations out there. Kermode is correct, his objectivity has been colored if he has failed to appreciate either of these fine films.
What a joy it is to read through the comments section and see how many people enjoyed and recognized the utter brilliance of Excalibur and Zardoz. John Boorman was a true director in that his films are cinematic experiences and he uses the language of cinema that rare way where the images and performances tell you more than just the dialogue and story. One of the greatest directors ever.
Zardoz is actually very underrated. It by no means has contempt for science fiction, it's a surreal, New Wave sci-fi like they did in the 60s and 70s in Britain and elsewhere, it traffics in concepts and startling visual images like most progressive SF did.
Hello Tyler, I have just watched Zardoz for the first time... On DVD. Well... What a ride that was! If you are still there Tyler, I would love to hear your story of working on this please. Best wishes 👍
Zardoz and Excalibur are wonderful films, I absolutely love them both! Yes, they have their flaws (especially accent of the young Arthur in the early stages of Excalibur), but most of the classic or cult films that movie buffs hold dear are flawed in some way. OMG, will there ever be a better Merlin than Nicol Williamson in Excalibur? I doubt it. And Boorman wasn't showing contempt for the sci-fi genre. He was giving us sci-fi beyond the norm of spaceships, ray guns and aliens... some of the concepts in Zardoz are huge and off-the-wall... for a 1974 movie this was way ahead of its time. And both Excalibur and Zardoz have amazing visuals and scores.
Am I the only person in the world who doesn't hate Exorcist 2? Yes, it's completely batshit insane and makes sod all sense, but that's probably what I enjoy so much about it. It's not a patch on the first or even third films in the series but it's better than either of the prequel films by a mile. I also really, really like Zardoz.
Excalibur will be seen, as the years go by, as a true masterpiece of cinema. You wouldn't even be able to wade through the adundant source materials, let alone begin to create the cinematic jewel that is Boorman's adaption of the legends. Some do and some just talk, I guess.
Zardoz has to be appreciated as a (probably unintentional) rare example of intelligent camp. Just as Kermode has said about Howard the Duck, the best camp is the camp that aims the highest, that aims to be much more than camp. Zardoz is that sort of camp, which makes it all the more hilarious. It's a movie that gives you some genuinely interesting things to ponder in between the moments where you avert your eyes downwards and shake your head in laughter at how overwrought its ambitions are.
Why should Boorman think sci-fi is 'essentially trash' when ZARDOZ was only made only five years after Kubrick's 2001, and three years after Lucas' THX 1138?
I have to disagree slightly with Kermode here. First, I did like 'The Emerald Forest'. It was a very good film. Secondly, he did prove that he could make a film just as brilliant as 'Deliverance', albeit in a very different genre, and that was 'Hope And Glory' in 1987, which was based on his recollections about growing up in London during the Blitz of World War 2. Anyone who hasn't seen that film MUST see it. It is very well made indeed.
Why does everyone hate Zardoz? Can people just not get past the outfits? It's a fantastic movie with very profound thoughts on religion, society, psychology, death, and transcendence of karmic life, and,I think, a, not perfect, but certainly formidable science fiction flick, and certainly far from a mockery of sci-fi. I'd like to hear what Mark's real problems are with the movie.
I've always loved ZARDOZ. And I love the outfits and design. And Excalibur is NOT a guilty pleasure. It's a wonderful, beautiful movie. If you have a problem with Excalibur then you have a big problem. You can clearly not like it. Sure. But having a problem with it? Odd.
Karl Karlos I guess in that case it's as difficult to watch as it is to also be transmogrified by a wizard into the outer semblance of your enemy so you can nail his wife. Or for an aquatic demi-god to give you a magical sword. Or to stab that sword into a huge boulder which only a boy can remove. Or to quest for the holy grail.... and find it. If you want a realistic depiction of Britain during the dark ages, then yes, Excalibur will disappoint. As with any film based on myth and legend, suspension of belief is required.
Just as a point - I don't think Zardoz looks down on the sci-fi genre at all. At worst you could say that it had literary pretentions, or that its aspirations were philosophical (or faux-philosophical) rather than cinematic, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It looks tremendous and is a true, one-of-a-kind film that puts imagination and creativity above more conventional common sense, which is to be applauded (now more than ever).
Deliverance was an alltime classic. I saw Excalibur recently for the first time, ok Merlin's accent is a bit dodgy but overall i thought it was a decent effort and worth watching. Fortunately i've never seen the Exorcist sequel, lol.
Well, Mark, no matter what you say about "The Exorcist II: The Heretic", there are some of us who at least has a soft spot for it. Same with "Zardoz", "Excalibur", "The Emerald Forest", etc. It's literally true that it's an unbearably pretentious, insanely incoherent and hilariously wrongheaded movie. Still, in spite of the humorless madness of it all, there IS moviemaking magic in it. It's not "The Exorcist". It's a completely different animal: a preposterously flamboyant, ornery creature.
Exorcist II for what it is, is actually quite brilliant and imaginative. A typically misunderstood film. And Zardoz & Excalbur are two of the best genre films ever made
Mr. Kermode, you are a wonderful chap. We need you to stir us up and make us think about movie and helps us to love them more. (I love your skiffle group too).'The Exorcist 2' is a profoundly moving, audacious exploration of American genre films which was bound to upset you more than any other movie ever. John Boorman is at The Watershed in Bristol on May 10th. Why not turn up and give him that hug. Sean Kaye-Smith
I totally disagree with his assessment of "Excaliber" and "Zardoz." Say what you want about them, they are not boring or dull. Is Zardoz a great or even a good film? Probably not...although I have always enjoyed it. On the other hand, Excaliber (IMHO) is at least a minor masterpiece. I haven't seen either "The Exorcist" or the much reviled "Heretic" (and don't care much for the horror genre) so I don't have the negative opinion of Boorman's larger body of work. .
Zardoz is a Science Fiction Movie?! I thought it was about Religion, Mythology and Public Myth. Exorcist II is a Horror Movie?! I thought it was a film about Innocence and Purgation. The Exorcist is a Horror Movie?!? I thought it was a film about *EVERYTHING*
Ah, is the comment to Boorman, "you're not *just* a film maker but an auteur" similar to the attitude people have about Quentin The Tarantino? I feel that way about a lot of Tarantino's later stuff... Or should I say _work_ ?
You and your mates are in a dodgy pub/part of town. One of you mimics a banjo. You instantly know the reference, and the meaning. Not bad for a film made in 1970.
Not only is Exorcist II not the worst film ever, it is actually a pretty good film and quite possibly the most underrated film of all time. People are really stupid.
Mark, can you ask Mr Boorman to do an interview with you on camera - maybe via internet - so he can have a right to reply to your criticisms? I'd like to see that :)
Zardoz is a one of a kind gem - unlike anything else. Also, most memorable and existentially melancholic ending of a movie ever. I remember shocked and smitten by it when I first saw it like I was by very few other films. I LOVE ZARDOZ I hate Deliverance on the other hand because of its idea of "degenerate" that seems straight out of the epistels of St.Paul - so disgusting.
The Exorcist is not the greatest film ever made. Zardoz is! Ah-ha! Seriously, I love Zardoz and do not in any way think it trashes the sci-fi genre. How does it trash sci-fi exactly? Exorcist II is different. But I don't think he was trashing the horror genre here either. He is trashing religion though. The Exorcist is a very religious film. The Catholic Church advised on the production. It's what I call Catholic porn: we see awful things so to believe in the good (Lord) all the more.
Exorcist II was a compromise with Warner Brothers. It was the only way Boorman could get Excalibur made because nobody was interested in doing it. The argument made by Boorman that he could do something better than the original is all BS, and he knows that. That's why Exorcist II sucks. Boorman simply didn't want to do it. Now you could argue that he made two bad films with Excalibur. But, having been a life long fan of the Arthurian Legends, Boorman decided to make the movie as he saw fit. If you read Le Mort de Arthur, you would be completely disappointed with any cinematic representation. And that is always the gamble in adaptation.
Boorman might be overestimated / but I´m missing any objective data in Mark´s claims - these are just his subjective emotions made be a fan, not a critic / I would like to read any genuine and more analytical though or any historical investigation on Boorman - and there is not many - so thank you for your emotins but it didn´t enriched me - I still think Zardoz is a great movie and Exorcist just suffered bad editing
Mark, everyone knows Exorcist II sucks bes to forget about it...Instead sit down, relax and watch Hope and Glory, Taylor of Panama and The General and remember how good Boorman is!
well said mark! even though i don't agree with all your points: exorcist 2 was terrible and so was zardoz. i remember watching zardoz as a teenager and wonding how sci fi could be made as dull as that. having said that i quite liked emerald forest and beyond rangoon. i though excaliber was pretty good actually, in that eighties shiny armour way. boorman isn't that bad. however, mark is right, excorcist 2 is worst than plan 9 from outer space.
I agree it's absolutely nothing compared to the original. Doesn't compare at all. But worst film ever? I mean, EVER? Impossible - there are way too many worse films out there. If taken as a stand-alone 70's horror it has many redeeming qualities - Burton (even drunk is always worth watching), the awesome insane Morricone score, the gorgeous William Fraker cinematography, some of the best continuous, single-take scene blocking ever, crazed flying locust POVs, beautiful African studio-bound sets and much more. But to enjoy it (I hated it after first seeing the Exorcist) you simply have to see it as a completely stand-alone movie, and not a sequel at all. Then it's fun. Not brilliant. But still fun.
The guy with the internet handle Kermode references says Sorcerer is one of Friedkin's "cinematic crimes." Well, he showed how ignorant he is right there. Nothing else he says can be taken seriously. The Gaurdian and Jade, yeah, probably. But Sorcerer is one of the great films of cinema.
your problem with boorman is the fact that he made a sequel to your fav movie is silly.same as ebert's problem with david lynch for making dune. why not just say i dont like boorman and leave it at that, not come up with reasons such as rumors you heard. ok, you dont like boorman, i dont like james camereon. i dont like his mmovies, why i dont like him, not because of other things. anyway,excaliber is a good movie, so is hope and glory.
exorcist 2 is hated a lot because its nothing like the orig, however the orig script for exorcist 2 was a whole lot better and a lot closer to the orig film thats why linda blair got on board, however john boorman rewrote the script many times spoiling it and in a way cheating linda blair out of making a good sequal. The film shot has interesting parts to it but i think the locusts stuff is way out there, even though the demon potrayed in the movie pazuzu is all about starvation n drought if you read books on the name
The Emerald forest ? I thought that was great film . :( and excalibur , Mark is right though i am the same with directors ,once they piss me off , i let rip with the critical analysis .
worst film of all time, oh c'mon. biggest and fatal flaw of Exorcist 2 is that it departures much from tone of the first film. friedkin attended the film to be a more realistic picture about exorcism, and second shifted more to audience friendly, bit adventurous, straight genre film. otherwise it's masterly crafted and Burton was good as always in opinion. :) I wouldn't agree on Boormans later career either , Excalibur and General were good films.
I like him. Don't always agree with him. As I don't agree with him here at all. But I love other people's opinions if they're thought out and articulated well. Then it's fun.
I can totally respect why John Boorman has a following. What he brings to the table is well respected by people who love film as an artistic medium. I don't like most of his work, it doesn't do anything for me. But I'd be in fine company debating a fan of Boorman as oppose to a window licker who can't wait for the 17th Fast and Furious movie to come out. That said, if he didn't like Friedkin's Exorcist then he's a prick for wanting to "fix it." I wasn't broken John. He's too pretentious for my blood.
The Exorcist 2 is one of the worst films ever made, it's almost as if Boorman was dropping a steaming turd and pissing on the original all at the same time. The fact that he also made Deliverence doesn't quite make up for Exorcist 2 though in my book.
To my mind Excalibur is one of the greatest films of all time. I saw it many times in my childhood, I watched it again recently - and I absolutely love it.
I still love Excalibur.
Has everybody forgotten "Hope and glory"??
The Sorcerer is excellent what a fool.
I love Excalibur!
Friedkin's crime against cinema is Sorcerer? Why the hell doesn't Kermode leap into the defence when he reads that?
I just heard that and looked down in the comments ready to say the same thing! Such a dig at Sorcerer is a more important topic to address from this guy's message. Jade, on the other hand, is a high crime against cinema...
Excalibur ....prepare for battle scene is pure art....majestic, unforgettable, mythical, utter magic...kermode wtf is wrong with you
Excalibur is a piece of very fine art if you can’t see that perhaps you can’t understand it.
Wait who the hell thought Sorcerer was a bad movie?
Excalibur is a seminal movie and the finest treatment of the King Arthur legend in existence.
The Tailor of Panama is one of the better John Le Carre adaptations out there.
Kermode is correct, his objectivity has been colored if he has failed to appreciate either of these fine films.
Liked because someone remembered "The Tailor of Panana".
What a joy it is to read through the comments section and see how many people enjoyed and recognized the utter brilliance of Excalibur and Zardoz. John Boorman was a true director in that his films are cinematic experiences and he uses the language of cinema that rare way where the images and performances tell you more than just the dialogue and story. One of the greatest directors ever.
You got to see John Boorman's new film Queen & Country.
Zardoz is actually very underrated. It by no means has contempt for science fiction, it's a surreal, New Wave sci-fi like they did in the 60s and 70s in Britain and elsewhere, it traffics in concepts and startling visual images like most progressive SF did.
Zardoz was the idea of the same people who made SILENT RUNNING.
Just so you know.
And it is a good cheesy movie.
I know I worked on both films.
Hello Tyler, I have just watched Zardoz for the first time... On DVD.
Well... What a ride that was!
If you are still there Tyler, I would love to hear your story of working on this please.
Best wishes 👍
excalibur is an excellent movie
Excalibur is class, Nicol Williamson is excellent.
Zardoz and Excalibur are wonderful films, I absolutely love them both! Yes, they have their flaws (especially accent of the young Arthur in the early stages of Excalibur), but most of the classic or cult films that movie buffs hold dear are flawed in some way. OMG, will there ever be a better Merlin than Nicol Williamson in Excalibur? I doubt it. And Boorman wasn't showing contempt for the sci-fi genre. He was giving us sci-fi beyond the norm of spaceships, ray guns and aliens... some of the concepts in Zardoz are huge and off-the-wall... for a 1974 movie this was way ahead of its time. And both Excalibur and Zardoz have amazing visuals and scores.
I have to watch Zardoz again it seems to be a big guilty pleasure.
Am I the only person in the world who doesn't hate Exorcist 2? Yes, it's completely batshit insane and makes sod all sense, but that's probably what I enjoy so much about it. It's not a patch on the first or even third films in the series but it's better than either of the prequel films by a mile.
I also really, really like Zardoz.
Excalibur will be seen, as the years go by, as a true masterpiece of cinema. You wouldn't even be able to wade through the adundant source materials, let alone begin to create the cinematic jewel that is Boorman's adaption of the legends.
Some do and some just talk, I guess.
Zardoz has to be appreciated as a (probably unintentional) rare example of intelligent camp. Just as Kermode has said about Howard the Duck, the best camp is the camp that aims the highest, that aims to be much more than camp. Zardoz is that sort of camp, which makes it all the more hilarious. It's a movie that gives you some genuinely interesting things to ponder in between the moments where you avert your eyes downwards and shake your head in laughter at how overwrought its ambitions are.
Why should Boorman think sci-fi is 'essentially trash' when ZARDOZ was only made only five years after Kubrick's 2001, and three years after Lucas' THX 1138?
I have to disagree slightly with Kermode here. First, I did like 'The Emerald Forest'. It was a very good film. Secondly, he did prove that he could make a film just as brilliant as 'Deliverance', albeit in a very different genre, and that was 'Hope And Glory' in 1987, which was based on his recollections about growing up in London during the Blitz of World War 2. Anyone who hasn't seen that film MUST see it. It is very well made indeed.
Why does everyone hate Zardoz? Can people just not get past the outfits? It's a fantastic movie with very profound thoughts on religion, society, psychology, death, and transcendence of karmic life, and,I think, a, not perfect, but certainly formidable science fiction flick, and certainly far from a mockery of sci-fi. I'd like to hear what Mark's real problems are with the movie.
I've always loved ZARDOZ. And I love the outfits and design. And Excalibur is NOT a guilty pleasure. It's a wonderful, beautiful movie. If you have a problem with Excalibur then you have a big problem. You can clearly not like it. Sure. But having a problem with it? Odd.
Robert Burkart love zardoz
How can you not love Excalibur?... What the hell is wrong with you man?
Karl Karlos
The suit of amour sex scene drips with symbolism and you're worried about the mechanics of it?....jesus!
+Talisguy True, but that's the case with all fiction. Excalibur is difficult to buy into because of the boldness and uniqueness of its vision.
Karl Karlos
I guess in that case it's as difficult to watch as it is to also be transmogrified by a wizard into the outer semblance of your enemy so you can nail his wife. Or for an aquatic demi-god to give you a magical sword. Or to stab that sword into a huge boulder which only a boy can remove. Or to quest for the holy grail.... and find it. If you want a realistic depiction of Britain during the dark ages, then yes, Excalibur will disappoint. As with any film based on myth and legend, suspension of belief is required.
okay but kind of a snoozer
Agree.
Sorcerer a 'cinematic crime' what tf?
Just as a point - I don't think Zardoz looks down on the sci-fi genre at all. At worst you could say that it had literary pretentions, or that its aspirations were philosophical (or faux-philosophical) rather than cinematic, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. It looks tremendous and is a true, one-of-a-kind film that puts imagination and creativity above more conventional common sense, which is to be applauded (now more than ever).
Excalibur remains a favourite
Deliverance was an alltime classic. I saw Excalibur recently for the first time, ok Merlin's accent is a bit dodgy but overall i thought it was a decent effort and worth watching. Fortunately i've never seen the Exorcist sequel, lol.
Someone needs to point out what a great film The General is (Excalibur is bad but it's the right kind of bad)
Ed Wood didn't NEED money. His 'vision' was more than enough.
He should go back and read Pauline Kael's review of TheHeretic; she thought it better than TheExorcist.
Well, Mark, no matter what you say about "The Exorcist II: The Heretic", there are some of us who at least has a soft spot for it. Same with "Zardoz", "Excalibur", "The Emerald Forest", etc. It's literally true that it's an unbearably pretentious, insanely incoherent and hilariously wrongheaded movie. Still, in spite of the humorless madness of it all, there IS moviemaking magic in it. It's not "The Exorcist". It's a completely different animal: a preposterously flamboyant, ornery creature.
Exorcist II for what it is, is actually quite brilliant and imaginative. A typically misunderstood film. And Zardoz & Excalbur are two of the best genre films ever made
The Emerald forest is great EVERYBODY WATCH IT !
your wrong about exorcist 2
Mr. Kermode, you are a wonderful chap. We need you to stir us up and make us think about movie and helps us to love them more. (I love your skiffle group too).'The Exorcist 2' is a profoundly moving, audacious exploration of American genre films which was bound to upset you more than any other movie ever. John Boorman is at The Watershed in Bristol on May 10th. Why not turn up and give him that hug. Sean Kaye-Smith
Zardoz is brilliant.
I totally disagree with his assessment of "Excaliber" and "Zardoz." Say what you want about them, they are not boring or dull. Is Zardoz a great or even a good film? Probably not...although I have always enjoyed it. On the other hand, Excaliber (IMHO) is at least a minor masterpiece. I haven't seen either "The Exorcist" or the much reviled "Heretic" (and don't care much for the horror genre) so I don't have the negative opinion of Boorman's larger body of work. .
@gibboanx: He's not Scorsese's biggest fan so I don't think he'd mind
Zardoz is a Science Fiction Movie?! I thought it was about Religion, Mythology and Public Myth.
Exorcist II is a Horror Movie?! I thought it was a film about Innocence and Purgation.
The Exorcist is a Horror Movie?!? I thought it was a film about *EVERYTHING*
Excalibur is great
Tailor of Panama is a fine film
Ah, is the comment to Boorman, "you're not *just* a film maker but an auteur" similar to the attitude people have about Quentin The Tarantino?
I feel that way about a lot of Tarantino's later stuff... Or should I say _work_ ?
only his later stuff? Tarantino's been taking himself too seriously since the second half of the 1990s.- if not earlier.
Jackie Brown was his last good movie. His best in my opinion. But after that he went off into outer space.
Excalibur is a briliant movie.Totally agree with Exorcist II,that movie was trash!!!
With the exception of Excalibur, I'm not going to argue with your list.
Emerald forest was very good
Has this critic heard of the New Criticism concept? Might be helpful for him...
You and your mates are in a dodgy pub/part of town. One of you mimics a banjo. You instantly know the reference, and the meaning. Not bad for a film made in 1970.
I thought The Emerald Forest was a pretty good film
Not only is Exorcist II not the worst film ever, it is actually a pretty good film and quite possibly the most underrated film of all time. People are really stupid.
I don’t care what anyone says, Zardoz is good shit!
Exorcist II : The Heretic - for which The World was Not-Yet Ready.
Quite, Watson.
I think Exorcist 2: The HairyTick is the bestest Exorcist film.
Some Exorcist related bias going on here! Haha
Exorcist 2 was the wrong film for John Boorman as Dune was wrong for David Lynch. I been a fan of Boorman since Point Blank. I like his visual style.
Mark, can you ask Mr Boorman to do an interview with you on camera - maybe via internet - so he can have a right to reply to your criticisms? I'd like to see that :)
Hope and Glory (1987) was good
It is his job.
What is your job?
John Boorman is my Mum's uncle!
I like Excalibur
Zardoz is a one of a kind gem - unlike anything else. Also, most memorable and existentially melancholic ending of a movie ever. I remember shocked and smitten by it when I first saw it like I was by very few other films.
I LOVE ZARDOZ
I hate Deliverance on the other hand because of its idea of "degenerate" that seems straight out of the epistels of St.Paul - so disgusting.
The Exorcist is not the greatest film ever made. Zardoz is! Ah-ha!
Seriously, I love Zardoz and do not in any way think it trashes the sci-fi genre. How does it trash sci-fi exactly?
Exorcist II is different. But I don't think he was trashing the horror genre here either. He is trashing religion though. The Exorcist is a very religious film. The Catholic Church advised on the production. It's what I call Catholic porn: we see awful things so to believe in the good (Lord) all the more.
Excorcist is an OK film. I prefer roadkill with Paul walker
Excalibur, Excalibur, Excalibur. Also, Point Blank.
"Kermode"? Never heard of him? Does anybody care?
Exorcist II was a compromise with Warner Brothers. It was the only way Boorman could get Excalibur made because nobody was interested in doing it. The argument made by Boorman that he could do something better than the original is all BS, and he knows that. That's why Exorcist II sucks. Boorman simply didn't want to do it. Now you could argue that he made two bad films with Excalibur. But, having been a life long fan of the Arthurian Legends, Boorman decided to make the movie as he saw fit. If you read Le Mort de Arthur, you would be completely disappointed with any cinematic representation. And that is always the gamble in adaptation.
Boorman might be overestimated / but I´m missing any objective data in Mark´s claims - these are just his subjective emotions made be a fan, not a critic / I would like to read any genuine and more analytical though or any historical investigation on Boorman - and there is not many - so thank you for your emotins but it didn´t enriched me - I still think Zardoz is a great movie and Exorcist just suffered bad editing
I agree. Exorcist II is horrid, but Zardoz is great.
Mark, everyone knows Exorcist II sucks bes to forget about it...Instead sit down, relax and watch Hope and Glory, Taylor of Panama and The General and remember how good Boorman is!
well said mark! even though i don't agree with all your points: exorcist 2 was terrible and so was zardoz. i remember watching zardoz as a teenager and wonding how sci fi could be made as dull as that. having said that i quite liked emerald forest and beyond rangoon. i though excaliber was pretty good actually, in that eighties shiny armour way. boorman isn't that bad. however, mark is right, excorcist 2 is worst than plan 9 from outer space.
Wow
Who the hell is this guy? What on earth is he talking about? Exorcist 2 worst film ever? What the hell
Compared to the original. Yeah it is.
Steven Campbell To each his own. For me Exorcist 2 is the superior film.
21innocentbystander poor trolling. Do better.
chanceie12 I swear I'm not trolling. I love The Heretic.
I agree it's absolutely nothing compared to the original. Doesn't compare at all. But worst film ever? I mean, EVER? Impossible - there are way too many worse films out there. If taken as a stand-alone 70's horror it has many redeeming qualities - Burton (even drunk is always worth watching), the awesome insane Morricone score, the gorgeous William Fraker cinematography, some of the best continuous, single-take scene blocking ever, crazed flying locust POVs, beautiful African studio-bound sets and much more. But to enjoy it (I hated it after first seeing the Exorcist) you simply have to see it as a completely stand-alone movie, and not a sequel at all. Then it's fun. Not brilliant. But still fun.
the general was decent
The guy with the internet handle Kermode references says Sorcerer is one of Friedkin's "cinematic crimes." Well, he showed how ignorant he is right there. Nothing else he says can be taken seriously. The Gaurdian and Jade, yeah, probably. But Sorcerer is one of the great films of cinema.
O.k. then here goes are you all ready, ahem. You know what I actually enjoyed exorcist 2 the heretic. It's not such a terrible film really it isn't.
your problem with boorman is the fact that he made a sequel to your fav movie is silly.same as ebert's problem with david lynch for making dune. why not just say i dont like boorman and leave it at that, not come up with reasons such as rumors you heard. ok, you dont like boorman, i dont like james camereon. i dont like his mmovies, why i dont like him, not because of other things. anyway,excaliber is a good movie, so is hope and glory.
exorcist 2 is hated a lot because its nothing like the orig, however the orig script for exorcist 2 was a whole lot better and a lot closer to the orig film thats why linda blair got on board, however john boorman rewrote the script many times spoiling it and in a way cheating linda blair out of making a good sequal. The film shot has interesting parts to it but i think the locusts stuff is way out there, even though the demon potrayed in the movie pazuzu is all about starvation n drought if you read books on the name
The Emerald forest ? I thought that was great film . :( and excalibur , Mark is right though i am the same with directors ,once they piss me off , i let rip with the critical analysis .
I Loved it, Great...
HATERS GONNA HATE.
worst film of all time, oh c'mon. biggest and fatal flaw of Exorcist 2 is that it departures much
from tone of the first film. friedkin attended the film to be a more realistic picture about exorcism, and second shifted more to audience friendly, bit adventurous, straight genre film. otherwise it's masterly crafted and Burton was good as always in opinion. :)
I wouldn't agree on Boormans later career either , Excalibur and General were good films.
Mark Kermode is such a pompous prat.
I like him. Don't always agree with him. As I don't agree with him here at all. But I love other people's opinions if they're thought out and articulated well. Then it's fun.
I can totally respect why John Boorman has a following. What he brings to the table is well respected by people who love film as an artistic medium. I don't like most of his work, it doesn't do anything for me. But I'd be in fine company debating a fan of Boorman as oppose to a window licker who can't wait for the 17th Fast and Furious movie to come out. That said, if he didn't like Friedkin's Exorcist then he's a prick for wanting to "fix it." I wasn't broken John. He's too pretentious for my blood.
The Exorcist 2 is one of the worst films ever made, it's almost as if Boorman was dropping a steaming turd and pissing on the original all at the same time. The fact that he also made Deliverence doesn't quite make up for Exorcist 2 though in my book.
Hell in the Pacific is anything but a good movie.