Talk:Exorcist II: The Heretic

Evaluating E2

There are quite a few people who defend this film (see, eg. [1]), and in particular people who think it was the best of the three follow-up films. The cinematography and sound-track, in particular, are mostly well-thought of, even by the film's detractors. The film maybe deserves a section outlining the initial reaction, and considered reaction to the film. ---- Charles Stewart 16:55, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've toned down some of the more negative comments about the film, plus removed hyperbolic comment about the original ("the movie that forever changed Hollywood"!!??). I've also added info on the movie's developing cult following and recent critical re-evaluation, as well as noting Pauline Kael's enthusiastic response to the film at the time of its release.200.122.158.40 16:11, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

The only problem is that now the article is almost too kind. There is only a passing reference to the fact that the movie bombed at the box office, and almost no negative comments about the film remain at all. The last time I saw this article, it described the movie as one of the worst films ever made. Now it's more like an E2 fan's masturbatory aid than anything else. We really need to expunge the NPOV from this article and make it more neutral; find a middle ground between the positive and the negative. 129.59.99.211 03:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I remember seeing a show about this movie (probably True Hollywood Story). Obviously it was unquestionably pro-Heretic, but I remember someone made a pretty interesting reference toward the movie being less a horror film than a survivor story/drama. Is this angle widely-discussed? 24.228.54.78 01:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree about the NPOV, though I dont really think any one is "favoring" the movie here. Its just that the article is too long and too detailed for an encyclopedia. I do appreciate whoever took the time to write all this, its just too much information, at least in the summary. ShirleyPartridge (talk) 09:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Exorcist2poster.jpg

Image:Exorcist2poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use added. SkierRMH 07:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Exorcist II: The Heretic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081227143039/http://filmfreakcentral.net/notes/jboormaninterview.htm to http://filmfreakcentral.net/notes/jboormaninterview.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Sequels

57 minutes into Time After Time (1979 film) there is a billboard for Ghirardelli Square advertising Exorcist IV. The film debuted 28 September 1979 but Wells travels into the future by 5 November 1979.

Exorcist III didn't come out until 17 August 1990 so I take it that sequels to 1977's Heretic (presumably the 3rd in 1978) was some sort of humor? 184.145.18.191 (talk) 00:17, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

1979

~~According to EXORCIST 3, the first EXORCIST was set in 1975 (1975 is listed as the year Damien died on his headstone). HERETIC begins with Lamont saying 4 years has passed since the original film. So HERETIC is set in 1979. I'll include this. Abbythecat~~