The Pope's Exorcist VS Exorcist: The Beginning

As you may have noticed, I’ve recently written a review of Exorcist: The Beginning (2004), and not long before that, I had written one of The Exorcist: The Version You’ve Never Seen. Around the time I was writing the more recent review, I finally got to watch The Pope’s Exorcist (2023). I had been wanting to see it since I’d watched the trailer. Sure, there was a possessed kid again, but there were hints of something more. At one point the demon tells the titular exorcist that he had been played and it cuts to… the Pope himself! I was ready for some demonic Vatican intrigue, but unfortunately, the movie had other plans. (Needless to say, there will be SPOILERS)

Exorcist: The Beginning and The Pope’s Exorcist may look very different, but they suffer from the same big problem - the inability to move beyond the tired possessed child scenario. It’s not that they couldn’t have done it if they had wanted it. Both movies have interesting elements that could’ve easily been turned into the main plot. However, instead, they merely use them as backdrop for yet another retread of The Exorcist, while at the same time losing a key characteristic of the demonic classic - the banal setting that made the supernatural goings-on more unsettling. If Exorcist: The Beginning gives viewers a spooky buried church where no church should’ve been atop an underground altar for bloody offerings, The Pope’s Exorcist spends most of its time at a dilapidated abbey that includes a covered well with the Vatican seal on the lid filled with skulls from Inquisition victims, and a hidden chamber in the basement, where Fathers Amorth and Esquibel find a dead bishop inside a cage with a key in his stomach that opens another door that leads to an underground cave where yet another corpse awaits them sitting on a throne by a sulfur lake that may or may not lead to Hell itself. Frankly, it would’ve been more shocking if there hadn’t been a demonic possession there. The secrets the 2 priests find are a lot more interesting than the possession they’re dealing with, just like the history of the buried church in Exorcist: The Beginning.

The possessions themselves also share some issues. In The Pope’s Exorcist, the boy’s possession may be just a step in a larger plan, but that doesn’t change the fact that for most of the movie it’s no different than any other possession; and when we finally get to the demonic middle goal, it’s time for an OTT final confrontation that consists of Father Amorth stumbling about, yelling, and finally levitating, surrounded by a fiery CGI spectacle. Naturally, he wins, and the audience never gets to see Asmodeus, King of Hell, be his full devious self. All we get is a weird voice, a few changes in physical appearance, swearing, groping, some mild supernatural phenomena, and non-lethal choking. How can a demon this powerful not get a single kill? Exorcist: The Beginning creates a misdirection over Pazuzu’s real vessel that results in a pretty dull ‘possession’ for most of the movie until it’s time for the reveal and we get some equally dull swearing, unoriginal makeup, and terrible-looking demonic moves. That it happens instantaneously, makes it considerably less disturbing than Regan’s slow destruction. I already mentioned the crappy CGI in Exorcist: The Beginning in my other review, but while Asmodeus was luckier in The Pope’s Exorcist, there are a couple of times when things cross the line into unintentionally funny. The biggest one is the demonic version of Adella exploding, but Father Amorth levitating looks pretty ridiculous, too. There’s also time for a homage to The Exorcist with the appearance of carved messages on the boy’s body, and the typical unnatural vomiting, but the physical decay and corruption never reaches the extreme levels of the possession classic. Each movie’s choices end up undermining their respective demon. Pazuzu is a Mesopotamian wind demon that can ward off other demons, and Asmodeus is a Jewish demon, one of the Kings of Hell under Lucifer, who alternatively represents lust or revenge. They should not sound alike and do the same things. Well, almost the same things, since, as mentioned above, for some reason The Pope’s Exorcist doesn’t allow its demon to kill anyone. In fact, incestuous groping notwithstanding, lustful Asmodeus comes across as a lot tamer than Pazuzu. Neither has a distinctive personality and I’m not just talking about how similar they are to each other. This is particular egregious in the case of Asmodeus considering how much lore there is about him. Pazuzu’s antiquity doesn’t manifest itself in any visible way either. Sure, we’re told he’s from Mesopotamia and has been around for thousands of years, but when he starts talking all we get is modern English vulgarity.

Something that is always to be expected in exorcism movies is the presence of religion, usually Christianity, and more specifically, Catholicism. I’m not a religious person, but I don’t mind all the crucifixes and praying, and even think it adds to the sinister atmosphere. However, in both movies, and in the original The Exorcist, it’s more than just God, an individual priest, or even a particular convent or monastery - this is the Church itself. Father Karras goes through all the official channels and the Vatican not only approves Regan’s exorcism, but also sends Merrin to perform it. In The Pope’s Exorcist, while Father Amorth may annoy the bureaucrats with his roguish attitude, he’s very much part of the Vatican hierarchy and is shown to have a friendly relationship with the Pope himself. In Exorcist: The Beginner, Merrin may start the movie on the outs with the Church, but by the end he’s back in Rome. Presenting the Church as the good guy given everything we know about it in the real world, is certainly a challenge, and somehow, The Pope’s Exorcist decided to make things even worse. And just how much worse? Well, turns out that, according to a journal Amorth and Esquibel find in the already mentioned underground cave, centuries ago, Asmodeus possessed the Pope’s chief exorcist and started the Inquisition. Yes, the movie actually blames the freaking INQUISITION on a demon rather than a bunch of Catholic zealots. The only way this wouldn’t have sounded so insanely wrong would’ve been if, instead of being thwarted, the demonic infiltration of the Church had been successful and the Pope was either already possessed or in danger of being possessed. The way the movie presents it, however, essentially absolves the Church of one of its most heinous collective acts, and merely blames it for covering it up. Then there are the priests’ respective sins. In Amorth’s case, he feels guilty for the suicide of an abused girl whose possession story he didn’t believe. It’s the kind of situation where you get why he blames himself, but at the same time can forgive him for it. However, she seems to have been driven mad after being abused by priests, which was covered up. Father Esquibel’s situation is a little bit different - he broke his vows by having sex with one of his young parishioners (not that young, thankfully). He let her believe he’d leave the Church for her, knowing full well he’d never do it. May I remind you that all this is taking place in 1980’s Spain? I have the feeling that wasn’t a good time period for a young, unmarried woman to be losing her virginity to anyone, much less a priest. The movie even shows the possessed boy’s mother, telling her daughter how people there are a lot more conservative than in the US. But of course, we’re not supposed to think about either of those young women as having been wronged by the Church. Or at least I hope not, because these women-shaped sins literally come back to haunt both men during the final confrontation. So, you get Amorth and Esquibel dealing with demonic versions of Rosaria and Adella respectively, and vanquishing them in the end. WTF? Who thought this was a good idea? Exorcist: The Beginning fares better (shocking, I know) by virtue of focusing on Merrin and his relationship with God. This makes it feel more like the character’s personal journey than praise for the Church… to which he returns in the end because apparently he couldn’t find God without special attire and elaborate rituals.

Frankly, after reviewing (or trying to review) these 2 movies back to back, I realized that I’m getting tired of these The Exorcist type movies. More hidden chambers and buried churches and less vomiting of weird shit, please.

By Danforth