Exorcist: The Beginning announced on DVD from Warners on Jan 4th (1 Viewer)

[Garrett Lundy]

Mixed a little hot

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Agreed. From my review:

"When it came to the audio of Exorcist: The Beginning, one issue dominated: bass! The movie poured on the low-end, and those elements played too prominent a role in the proceedings. Happily, bass stayed fairly tight and didn’t pop or become distorted. The mix simply played up the low-end too strongly, and it occasionally overwhelmed the rest of the audio. I sometimes found it hard to hear anything else because my subwoofer was knocking me against the wall."

 

[Paul Arnette]

I found this thread on the main page and figured it would already have this bit of info I found on Video Tropic's Website. Imagine my surprise when it hadn't.

Anyway...


I'm definitely looking forward to seeing the Schrader version because I have, as of yet, been unable to steel myself enough to watch another Renny Harlin movie.

 

[Ernest Rister]

Schrader has comments in Ebert's Movie Answer Man coloumn this week. Supposedly, the film will receive a limited theatrical re-issue in late April or sometime in May. Schrader's director-approved cut of the film is going to be screened at an international film festival in the next few days, followed by a limited theatrical release, and then, we can all assume, a DVD release probably in the late summer or early Fall.

When Schrader's cut is released on DVD, I plan on buying both his version and the Harlin version, which should prove to be a fascinating look at how two different directors handle very similar material.

 

[Elijah Sullivan]

Now I'm spinning Dominion: Prequel to The Exorcist (as Schrader's cut is called) and the new cut is much better. It's a bit cheesier - the effects are spotty and most of the music is synthesized (victims of a direct-to-video level post-prod budget, perhaps) and slower, but it's delivers in the ways advertised: smarter, deeper, more mature.

The transfer, alas, is pretty much the same as the old one. I mean, obviously it must be a new transfer, but it's got loads of edge enhancement just like the old one. I wish Storaro had the money to color time this a little more. I doubt he had the kind of freedom he did when working with Bertolucci or Coppola.

The most immediately striking thing about the transfer, however, is that it's 2.00/1 instead of 2.35/1 like the old DVD. I looked it up on IMDB and they say that 2.00 was the original ratio... which means the previous DVD was overcropped and this one is corrected. Good deal.

The audio isn't as good as the old DTS, but solid. It's now only DD 5.1.

The deleted scenes aren't great, but neither are they from the Harlin theatrical cut. They are Schrader cuts.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Has this come out already?

I would have figured Warner would make a little bigger deal about the DVD release than they did the theatrical release. I haven't even heard an announcement.

EDIT: Sorry; just checked your profile and saw you're a video store clerk. Is this a screener?

 

[JoshB]

I just viewed this one too. I thought Exorcist Beginning was ok, but nothing great. This one improves over that one in every aspect, and makes it a much better experience. They still could have done without a prequel all together, but this version clearly is the one of choice between the two. A much better acted, written, and directed film than Harlin's.

I found the transfer to be superb, and nearly reference quality. The scenes in the African desert were amazing in terms of detail and color. The sound was good, but nothing like the audio assault of the DTS on its counterpart. This one is at least worth a rent to see what they were driving for with the film to begin with.

 

[Elijah Sullivan]

Bryan,

it comes out Tuesday and we get our boxes by the Thursday previous. We get a lot of stuff and sometimes I don't watch any of it. This week I'm up to my neck in stuff... just finished watching Gus van Sant's Last Days and the Criterion Le Samourai. Last night was Bewitched. All solid DVDs. These were all final copies; I haven't seen a quality screener in years, but then again, we're pretty hole-in-the-wall.

I took another gander at Dominion with friends on a larger setup and... I'm gonna have to disagree with Josh on the video quality. The audio stood up, but the video was indistinct and there were regular dust splotches. It also looked way, way over-processed for my tastes. It could have been better represented - and was, earlier this year.

Still, OAR wins out for me. Even though 2.00/1 is really strange to look at: my brain couldn't decide if I was seeing a zoomed-in 2.35 image or an overcropped 1.85. As a result, I got a bit queasy. What a weird response!

 

[Anthony Neilson]

I saw DOMINION on the big screen recently and thought it was absolutely awful. It's marginally better than Harlin's version - a pretentious turkey as opposed to a mindless turkey - but they both stink, imo, and I'd rather watch EXORCIST 3 or 2 before watching either of them again.

Much as I wanted Schrader's cut to be a lost masterpiece, it just isn't so. I'd seriously warn anyone against blind-buying. Rent first ; I doubt it's one you'll be returning to very often.

 

[Bryan Tuck]

Just out of curiosity, do you know what ratio it was projected at? Was it actually a scope print windowboxed at 2:1, or was it just cropped at 2.35:1?

 

[Jordan_E]

Call it curiosity, it being the Halloween season, or just the plain old Freak Factor, but I really want to see this movie. BUT, should I rent this one or the House of Wax remake tomorrow? I'm on that BB movie pass thing and one of the two I rent at a time is already reserved for (blech) Bewitched, as the wife wants to see that one!

 

[Michael Elliott]

I'd say go for both. This film and WAX shipped from Netflix this morning. I don't have very high hopes for either film though.

 

[Vincent-P]

I would bet Dominion was projected at 2.00:1 because Storario is pretty fanatical about his idea for filming all films at 2.00:1 and without it having a wide release, it wouldn't really be necessary to change it's ratio to fit better with multiplexes.

 

[JoshB]

From what I have seen in my copy, it look alot like 2.00:1 to me. IMDB.com has the following for the film's specs:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0449086/technical

The cinimatography is superb, and much better than Sorario's previous effort in Exorcist Beginning. Since it is a slower paced film and not edited liek a meth addict, it is much more pleasant on the eyes.

I still think it is a fine looking image, but previous comments about specks on the film print are correct. This being a recent film the elements should be in great shape, just like Exorcist Beginning, but given this ones box office and reputation, I doubt much care was given, but still Warner has recently provided some fine reference quality transfers even to lesser performing titles.

 

[Will K]

My eyes have finally witnessed Paul Schrader’s once-elusive prequel formerly known as Exorcist: The Beginning. For those of us familiar with the Exorcist series, a retread of this film’s troubled history isn’t necessary. Until now, we’ve only had Renny Harlin’s admittedly entertaining, but garish and absurd version that hit theaters last fall.

Once Warner Bros. finally unleashed the Schrader version in a handful of theaters a few months ago, the word of mouth was generally “brilliant” or “awful” and almost never in between. Is this the disaster that Morgan Creek made it out to be? Hardly. While it’s somewhat understandable from a marketing standpoint why the studio had issues, Dominion is very good film, contrary to what co-writer Caleb Carr has expressed in interviews, to say nothing of James Robinson.

As this version leans toward a more meditative mode of storytelling, no doubt will some impatient viewers find the build-up more challenging. That being said, the film is engaging and moves along at a reasonable clip. As the presence of unearthly (and human) evil begins to take control, the film grows more intense and fascinating. The sense of dread here is well executed. The obligatory possession scenes are short, but they are unnerving and ferocious in their delivery. The focus isn’t really on shocks, but works in almost making the viewer feel they in the room with the devil. I’ve seen hundreds of horror films since childhood and I don’t consider myself on to scare easily, but this movie got under my skin for reasons I’m not yet sure of. I’m sure some will be taken aback by the possessee’s final form, certainly an unusual, surreal choice. The finale, involving the exorcism and the demonic effects on the locals, is a bit chaotic, but certainly not the laugh riot Harlin provided in his Linda Blair rip-off ending.

I also have to note that weird, demonic music over the end credits is extremely cool.

The most obvious negative thing that can be said of Dominion is some effects were unfinished and look startlingly bad. Hopefully, viewers will understand it’s not the fault of the filmmakers, but rather the studio that kicked it to be curb without giving it the fine-tuning so many lesser releases are awarded. Sad indeed.

Like the poster above, I also noticed the (beautiful) cinematography was superior to the Harlin version. I find that pretty curious, given the same DP.

I’m starting to think this, Friedkin’s original theatrical cut of The Exorcist, and William Peter Blatty’s Exorcist III would make an awfully sublime triple feature.

 

[Anthony Neilson]

Got to say, I'm pretty flabbergasted that anyone could think this movie was sublime, but there you go - diversity is a wonderful thing.

I couldn't say what the OAR was when I saw it. Looked like 2.35 to me, but I was in the second row. The print looked like it hadn't been colour-timed properly in various scenes, so I wouldn't be surprised if the DVD is likewise. This was Schrader's personal print.

 

[Travis Brashear]

The issue of the aspect ratio has precedence with Storraro (witness the case of APOCALYPSE NOW, both the original and REDUX versions, both theatrically exhibited at 2.35:1 and both presented on DVD at Storraro's preferred ratio of 2:1). I'm sure this is a similar case where both EXORCIST prequels were theatrically exhibited at 2.35:1 but Schrader allowed Storraro's preference for the DVD of his edit, whereas Harlin did not.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Just saw it today, and I thought it was God-awfully insipid, talky, uninteresting and overrated (meaning it was deemed superior to Harlin's before it was ever seen).

When I heard that Schrader was let go in favor of Harlin, I too went to see BEGINNING with very low and suspicious expectations. I wound up being surprised that Harlin's version was more serious and involved in dealing with Merrin's troubled past than I ever thought possible, given all the pre-disposed doubts.

Sure, the silly ending of BEGINNING really stunk up the place, but guess what? The ending for DOMINION ain't a hell of a lot less lame. And all those CGI touches are evident in Schrader's rendition too.

 

[Vincent_P]

The only CGI effect that bothers me in DOMINION is the daytime sequence with the hyenas which is clearly unfinished...

The other clearly unfinished aspect is the score. The few bits of music that Angelo Badalementi gave to his friend Schrader to use are wonderful, and make me wish that Schrader had been given a proper budget to finish his film and hire Badalamenti to record a complete score, but I digress...

Technical issues asside due to the lack of proper finishing fuinds, DOMINION is a SUPERB film. It's an intelligent, thought-provoking, well-written and wonderfully acted effort that fits perfectly into Blatty's EXORCIST ouvre and absolutely deserves to be seen and appreciated for the smart work of art that it is. To those who are sitting on the fence, give this film a chance- you just might discover the same provocative and memorable work of art that I did.

Vincent

 

[Simon Howson]

>I would bet Dominion was projected at 2.00:1 because Storario >is pretty fanatical about his idea for filming all films at >2.00:1 and without it having a wide release, it wouldn't >really be necessary to change it's ratio to fit better with >multiplexes.

Unfortunatley Morgan Creek were so idiotic that they didn't even let Storaro time the release prints. Instead this was done by Caleb Dechanel as a favour to Paul Schrader.

Furthermore, the release prints were either 2.35:1 anamorphic, or 1.85:1 spherical. No 2.00:1 prints were made.