paulclaassen I found it fascinating at first, but it then dwindles to a boring talkie with a bit of action now and then. There were no real scares and it wasn't really frightening or disturbing, as we've come to expect from Exorcist movies. The CGI effects were very stocky, especially the animals. The hyenas were so stocky it was like watching a video game. As the film progressed, I related less and less to it, and later, found it very boring.

Bonehead-XL You know the story by now: Morgan Creek wanted to make a prequel to "The Exorcist" and hired to Paul Schrader to do so. After delivering them his movie, the studio dismissed it for not being gory enough. Renny Harlin, esteemed filmmaker of "Cutthroat Island" and "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4," was brought in to completely reshoot the film. After Renny Harlin's excretal "Exorcist: The Beginning" was unleashed on the world, to critical savaging and public indifference, Morgan Creek figured they may as well release Paul Schrader's original cut. Given the unwieldy title, "Dominion: The Prequel to "The Exorcist,"" the film's art-house release made slightly less money and received only slightly better reviews.The two films follow the same general outlines. Father Merrin, his faith shaken by atrocities seen during the war, goes to Africa as an archaeologist. A church, made in the wrong century and perfectly preserved inside, is dug up. The British army and the local tribe come close to trading blows. Aside from these elements, the two films play out in very different ways. In "Dominion," Merrin discovers a deformed, crippled child on the street. After the discovery of the church, the boy's condition begins to improve miraculously. This is the possessed child. The boy's condition plays out against the two armies coming to blows and Merrin's crisis of faith.In "The Beginning," the British army and the African tribes go to war because of an ill-defined cloud of evil floating over the area. It was dumb. In "Dominion," the conflict between the two armies is an issue of religious difference and imperialism. The African tribesman associate Christianity with the British army. The head general murders a girl without reason. The film draws explicit parallels between this scene and the Nazi atrocities seen at the beginning of the film. In response, the tribesman murders the young boys interested in Christianity. In response, a convert actively wonders if this Christianity thing is worth it. There's no amorphous cloud of evil spreading its influence over the world. Instead, the events that happen are born out of men and their weaknesses.Most fascinatingly, "Dominion" tackles with the cost of evil. In "The Beginning," Merrin's crisis of faith is the result of what happened in the war. That film didn't go any further as to why. In "Dominion," Merrin's sin is not a lack of faith but of guilt. He lives with what happened every day and it weights heavily on him. During the exorcism, the demon promises to take Merrin's guilt away from him. The film shows faith as a burden, as having to live with and deal with the things that happen to us. Evil is not a vague, grand idea. Instead, it happens because people do not care and walk away from their conflicts. This is a surprisingly profound idea to find in a horror movie, much less a horror movie prequel.Unlike the music video style gore of "The Beginning," "Dominion's" effects are much more subtle. The film does not attempt to replicate the shock value of the original. There's no swearing, green vomit, scarred faces, or bodily contortion. The only visual call back to the original "Exorcist" is brief appearances from the Captain Howdy face. When possessed, the boy's condition actually improves. His limbs straighten, his broken bones heal, his body grows strong and vitalized. This is a clever visualization of the film's theme of guilt and imperfection as something that makes us stronger. The confrontation between Merrin and the demon is not a series of shocking special effects. Instead, it's a battle of wills.That Morgan Creek would dismiss "Dominion" for being non-commercial and "not scary enough" is not exactly surprising. The film's biggest weakness is how slow paced it is. This is a character based movie. There's only small amounts of gore in short burst, such as a stillborn child or the torn apart bodies left inside the church. Instead, the movie is much more interested in its philosophical ideas. Therefore, it's never exactly scary and never generates any visceral thrills or shocks. Aside from an odd nightmare sequence, the film isn't attempting scares at all. Also, I'm afraid to say, both versions of "The Exorcist" prequel feature CGI hyenas. I guess somebody thought that was a good idea… Even if it is flawed, "Dominion: The Prequel to "The Exorcist"" is an intelligent, extremely well thought out film that wrestles with and presents some fascinating ideas. The performances are strong and the visuals are well constructed. Paul Schrader made a thoughtful continuation of "The Exorcist," one worthy of the name. It probably wouldn't have set the box office on fire but that still doesn't justify the existence of that Renny Harlin abomination.

kai ringler this couldn't have been a worse prequel if it tried, the only thing I really liked was the stuff about where he was made to choose which 10 people were to be killed at the beginning of the movie,, the father as it turns out is also into archaeology, and is on his 6 dig,, he's giving up on religion as he has lost all of his faith,, he finds a Christian Church buried to the roof in sand,, where the should not have been a Christian church,, apparently there is a lot of evil going on here and is transferred to a young handicapped boy,, thought Skarssgaard was weak and appeared to be bored in this one,, the action was dry, weak,, and the movie itself I thought was very boring,, nothing really scary about this only reason I gave it a 3 there were a few good things in the movie,, it was somewhat interesting..

T Y This is awful in a different way than the execrable Renny Harlin version. There is no scene you can point to that convinces you why Paul Schrader had to make this movie. He's made some real junk before, but it's shocking to see a Schrader movie that invokes no ideas whatsoever. To pretend like this has depth (and that was the reason it was suppressed) requires completely broken sense organs. Schrader can mark 2005 as the year he finally sold his soul completely, and eradicated the very last spark of intellect in his movies. Not helping things, is Gabriel Mann as Father Francis, who weighs about 95 pounds, has a distractingly sunken chest, and is off-putting in his over-emoting and sincerity. He is a very poor actor, and I was rooting for the earnest, whiny runt to get it good. Catholic overdramatics are the whole show. The possessed figure this time is silly and poorly dubbed. If you can't do better than Regan in '74 you really should skip the movie. Schrader is too much of a visual pornographer (pretty surfaces) to get anything out of this. All the sets, which are supposed to look eons old instead look like they were constructed one week earlier, then scrubbed clean again, an hour before filming. Skarsgaard goes for a contemplative evening walk at one point and passes multiple bright, sparkling clean brick walls that look exactly like a cheap set.