The Exorcist: The Complete Anthology (1973-2005)

[Eny-]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Nah - not even close. This is a one-film franchise IMO. The story is complete and well told as is. Its one of those things where I dont care to know years and years of backstory and fabricated stuff. I appreciate that they tried to keep the momentum going with the franchise and all that but.... the original is sooooo damned good that the task of making sequels is basically insurmountable.

Same problem for Alien/Aliens, Raiders Of the Lost Ark, and some other franchises where the sequels are useless.

Alien was not so damned good as well? Why did it need Aliens?

[gbolling1984]

tried going through this thread on my phone to find the answer but im using my phone and it's a little difficult. Are there any added features for the first film in this set or is it the same features from the last release? I pre-ordered and wondering if it's worth getting...even with the mediocre sequels.

[ditcin]

Originally Posted by gbolling1984

tried going through this thread on my phone to find the answer but im using my phone and it's a little difficult. Are there any added features for the first film in this set or is it the same features from the last release? I pre-ordered and wondering if it's worth getting...even with the mediocre sequels.

As far as I know nothing has been announced. Warner's is being very profile about this which probably means there's nothing special. Their slapping the movies onto BD with little or now effort. The HD masters were made probably for cable use and this is just another way to pay for the cost of remastering.
I don't think they actually care otherwise more info - or even the back of the box with a breakdown of features and even tech specs would have been released already.

[crutzulee]

I have been a lurker on this forum forever...This set is the first time that I have ever pre-ordered anything from amazon. I usually go to to a brick and mortar store on release date and pickup anticipated titles or order older titles when I read about deals here.

I have to say that the lack of details so close to release date is driving me a little crazy..I get that the original movie has nothing new to review or report but as all the other titles are making their debuts on Blu, I would have expected SOMETHING from the studio even if it is just to overhype an upconversion job..

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by ditcin

When I was a kid I used to set up my tape recorder in front of the TV with the mic in from of the speaker and wait for the advertisements for movies I wanted to see so I could record them. Since was before home video it was the only way. Sometimes instead of just waiting I would call up the stations and ask for the programing schedule for the commercials so it would make it easier.
Sometimes I would call up the local theater and tape this over the phone. (listen to the whole thing for the end part)

https://app.box.com/s/ohtj0satkadf6oml7ome

ha!! I did the same thing! I had tapes of movie trailers, actor interviews on talk shows, etc... I would sit for hours of watching TV sitcoms so I could get a movie trailer on tape!

[Dylan34]

Damn! Still no specs up! It's almost release day and nothing. I really would like to know if there are any special features at all plus how good or bad the transfers are going to be.

[slasherdisc]

Originally Posted by Dylan34

Damn! Still no specs up! It's almost release day and nothing. I really would like to know if there are any special features at all plus how good or bad the transfers are going to be.

Yeah. I keep checking this thread in hopes of reading some news about the specs of this set, The packaging especially.

[sarah_wentworth]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Nah - not even close. This is a one-film franchise IMO. The story is complete and well told as is. Its one of those things where I dont care to know years and years of backstory and fabricated stuff. I appreciate that they tried to keep the momentum going with the franchise and all that but.... the original is sooooo damned good that the task of making sequels is basically insurmountable.

Same problem for Alien/Aliens, Raiders Of the Lost Ark, and some other franchises where the sequels are useless.

Star Wars to. it was supposed to be a standalone movie but it made money so we got all the crappy sequels

Originally Posted by crutzulee

I have been a lurker on this forum forever...This set is the first time that I have ever pre-ordered anything from amazon. I usually go to to a brick and mortar store on release date and pickup anticipated titles or order older titles when I read about deals here.

I have to say that the lack of details so close to release date is driving me a little crazy..I get that the original movie has nothing new to review or report but as all the other titles are making their debuts on Blu, I would have expected SOMETHING from the studio even if it is just to overhype an upconversion job..

i'd really like to know more also

[ditcin]

I've come to terms of expecting nothing - only the same old trailers. Even then that will be modest.
THE EXORCIST has several trailers that were made for the many times it was re-released though the years.
THE HERETIC has only 2 (a teaser and trailer). Interestingly the teaser should end with the narrator stating, "Coming in the Summer of 1977, from Warner Bros.", but it's been looped off.
EXORCIST III has several trailers, one of which shows cut material from the exorcism. One of the trailers actually using the book title "Legion" as well.
There more than one trailer and a teaser for EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING.
While DOMINION has two, one of which is just a scene from the film and not a trailer at all.
If we talk TV spots there are a ton from THE EXORICST, only 3 for the HERETIC, several for III and several for THE BEGINNING and only 2 for DOMINION.
Radio Spots are cool, but for get getting them.

Truthfully, only the BOND release have been done well in terms of extras.

WB should have gone all out with this release. Personally, I would have made the box look like a book and called it "The Rite of Exorcism" release - a complete collection for the EXORCIST FILMS.

[DMRI2006]

WB clearly didn't invest a lot in this release. I was told by the PR firm that works with them that they aren't even going to send out screeners to websites, so I wouldn't count on many (or any) reviews ahead of time.

[ditcin]

Very nice. The first Exorcist film made them a ton of money... and they treat it like this!?

[sarah_wentworth]

Originally Posted by ditcin

I've come to terms of expecting nothing - only the same old trailers. Even then that will be modest.
THE EXORCIST has several trailers that were made for the many times it was re-released though the years.
THE HERETIC has only 2 (a teaser and trailer). Interestingly the teaser should end with the narrator stating, "Coming in the Summer of 1977, from Warner Bros.", but it's been looped off.
EXORCIST III has several trailers, one of which shows cut material from the exorcism. One of the trailers actually using the book title "Legion" as well.
There more than one trailer and a teaser for EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING.
While DOMINION has two, one of which is just a scene from the film and not a trailer at all.
If we talk TV spots there are a ton from THE EXORICST, only 3 for the HERETIC, several for III and several for THE BEGINNING and only 2 for DOMINION.
Radio Spots are cool, but for get getting them.

Truthfully, only the BOND release have been done well in terms of extras.

WB should have gone all out with this release. Personally, I would have made the box look like a book and called it "The Rite of Exorcism" release - a complete collection for the EXORCIST FILMS.

thats a good idea. i really can't wait to see 2, 3 and the prequels

[ditcin]

Originally Posted by sarah_wentworth

thats a good idea. i really can't wait to see 2, 3 and the prequels

Each is very different. In my opinion 3 is closest in tone to the first.

II is very different from them all in everyway and can easily be discount because of it. Give it a chance, be open minded and expect a very different kind of film. It is very Hollywood, big, spectacular and far reaching in scope. Where all the others remain true to the theme of "the mystery of faith" II tries to explain not the mystery, but the evolution of man in conjunction with faith.

The Prequels are very similar, yet different. The BEGINING is very Hollywood and like SUPRMAN RETURNS relies too much on throw back to the first film.
DOMINION is more subtle and internal, acting more like a "forward" in a book rather than a prequel. It leave more out and even more to the viewer to decide and unfold.

Above all, enjoy.

[ditcin]

Originally Posted by sarah_wentworth

thats a good idea. i really can't wait to see 2, 3 and the prequels

Each is very different. In my opinion 3 is closest in tone to the first.

II is very different from them all in everyway and can easily be discount because of it. Give it a chance, be open minded and expect a very different kind of film. It is very Hollywood, big, spectacular and far reaching in scope. Where all the others remain true to the theme of "the mystery of faith" II tries to explain not the mystery, but the evolution of man in conjunction with faith.

The Prequels are very similar, yet different. The BEGINING is very Hollywood and like SUPRMAN RETURNS relies too much on throw back to the first film.
DOMINION is more subtle and internal, acting more like a "forward" in a book rather than a prequel. It leave more out and even more to the viewer to decide and unfold.

Above all, enjoy.

[Dylan34]

Originally Posted by ditcin

Each is very different. In my opinion 3 is closest in tone to the first.

II is very different from them all in everyway and can easily be discount because of it. Give it a chance, be open minded and expect a very different kind of film. It is very Hollywood, big, spectacular and far reaching in scope. Where all the others remain true to the theme of "the mystery of faith" II tries to explain not the mystery, but the evolution of man in conjunction with faith.

The Prequels are very similar, yet different. The BEGINING is very Hollywood and like SUPRMAN RETURNS relies too much on throw back to the first film.
DOMINION is more subtle and internal, acting more like a "forward" in a book rather than a prequel. It leave more out and even more to the viewer to decide and unfold.

Above all, enjoy.

E3 is easily the best of the films since the original. Can't wait to receive the box set but can't believe still there are no specs up. Warner 's must have not done squat for these films. Very sad.

[demonknight]

Of course, it's the most similar in tone. It's a sequel written by the same person, and adapted from a psuedo-sequel book.

[balthazar_bee]

I'm not sure I agree that The Exorcist III is particularly similar to the original. It's not "on the wings of a demon" crazy like part II, yes, but it's also pretty removed from the documentary realism of Friedkin's kinetic original.

As it exists -- certainly not Blatty's preferred form -- The Exorcist III is a strange bird. On one hand, Blatty's clearly not particularly interested and/or experienced in delivering startling cinema, from a technical point of view. I guess that's a nice way of saying it can be a bit bland at times.

On the other hand, it's also a movie of ideas, where the first film is (I'd say) a movie of events. So while The Exorcist throws the viewer into a palpably terrifying scenario, going for the balls repeatedly (and succeeding) with some of the most visceral stuff I've ever seen, The Exorcist III wants us to be troubled by ideas.

Yes, there are some traditionally "scary" moments -- including one that borders on literal shit-your-pants territory -- but so much of the film occurs after or before the fact, in the wake of or lead up to violence. And the talk. My god, the talk.

Don't get me wrong, I love Blatty's talk, and I even enjoy the performances, which are some of the most unjustly maligned ones in horror this side of Shelley Duvall, but this has to be the wordiest film to be followed by a Roman numeral in history. By far. No contest. Amiright? (Of course, things would've been both better and worse if Blatty'd maintained control -- we'd lose the Roman numeral, but have even more talk.)

Speaking of the performances. It seems odd that Blatty opts to rein in just about every aspect of part III (in comparison to the original) except the performances. George C. Scott is one of the finest actors of all time, and I love him as Kinderman, but man, does he get B-I-G sometimes. And he's got nothing on (likewise brilliant) Dourif, who chews it up, spits it out, chews it up some more as the Gemini. There are times when I wonder just how much more effective the movie would be if the two of them took it down, say, 20%?

Love Ed Flanders and Jason Miller unreservedly. Funny to think that Blatty didn't plan to bring back Miller. Nor did he have a part for Nicol Williamson. Try picturing The Exorcist III without those two. I'm no champion of studio tampering, but we'll call the end result an exception that proves the rule that it's always a bad idea. Though it is a shame we'll probably never get a look at Blatty's "Legion" cut. (We've got the book though, which does name-drop Williamson at one point -- how's that for lattice of coincidence, Otto?)

Look at that -- I've forgotten where I was going. I guess I just wanted to say that The Exorcist III is its own thing, and that thing is a fascinating, problematic, frustrating, talky, hammy little rough diamond. I love it even while I'm cataloging its faults.

Compare that to The Heretic -- I frequently find new things to admire, but that doesn't change how cold I feel towards it as a film. Who'd have thought relative dilettante Blatty could make a sequel to a classic himself, have it butchered by the studio, and the resulting film is still more satisfying than one made by John Boorman?

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by sarah_wentworth

Star Wars to. it was supposed to be a standalone movie but it made money so we got all the crappy sequels

i'd really like to know more also

Say what you will about Episodes I-III & VI but The Empire Strikes Back is far from crap.

It's actually widely regarded as not only the best movie in the entire Star Wars saga but it's also seen as one of the best movies ever made.

[NoirFan]

Are people really citing Temple of Doom, The Empire Strikes Back, and Aliens as examples of poor franchise sequels?

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

Are people really citing Temple of Doom, The Empire Strikes Back, and Aliens as examples of sequels in franchises that should have remained stand-alone films?

Looks like it.