First off, a little prelude to this, the first edition of a new series on IGN FilmForce entitled. With the recent onslaught of remakes, re-imaginings, retoolings, etc., we thought it might be interesting to create a section that would compare similar films or films connected in some way. Our first segment will focus on the two recent Exorcist prequels: Exorcist: The Beginning , directed by Renny Harlin and Dominion: A Prequel to the Exorcist , directed by Paul Schrader.

<br+/><b><center>Schrader+on+set,+looking+as+though+he+may+be+reconsidering+what+he's+gotten+himself+into</center></b>

<br+/><b><center>Subtle,+Harlin+is+not</center></b>

The anomaly of two Exorcist films using the same lead actor, the same sets and a virtually identical script, is worthy of discussion in and of itself. Directors have been fired off projects before and other directors have been brought in to finish their work. Superman II comes to mind, for example; Richard Donner's excellent work on that film was bastardized by Richard Lester. Anything in the movie that is goofy is basically Lester's addition. But I don't think there's ever been a case of a studio scrapping an entire movie and then re-shooting the whole thing with a new director, much of the same cast and same lead, with almost the same script.These Exorcist prequels are interesting because of the complete oddity of the situation surrounding their making more than for the films that resulted. To see the decisions made by two very different directors given nearly identical locations, sets, budgets, etc. provides a perspective to analyze. Also noteworthy is the evolution of directors pegged for this project. Originally John Frankenheimer was directing with Liam Neeson in the lead role of Father Merrin. After Frankenheimer's passing, they made another intriguing choice with Paul Schrader (director of Auto Focus, writer of Taxi Driver). Liam Neeson also departed and Stellan Skarsgard was chosen as a suitable replacement; a decision that would ultimately mean playing the part two times over, though Skarsgard could never have guessed that at the time.So Schrader went and shot his movie and all was going along swimmingly. That is, until execs saw the finished product put together. More cerebral than scary, Schrader turned in a highly ambitious film that closely examined Merrin's undoing of faith. The film begun with a harrowing Holocaust sequence in which Merrin must pass judgment on the members of his parish. The events leave him thoroughly rattled, abandoning his faith to become an archeologist. The biggest problem with Schrader's version, at least in the eyes of the WB powers that be, was that the film doesn't really have any connection to an Exorcist film until almost midway through. More importantly, it has very few scares and little, if any, blood. It's not really a horror film and, worse yet in terms of marketability, its themes would likely have very little appeal to today's youth market, the key segment of the movie-going populous.Now, after taking the road less traveled and searching for a director who could create a respectable and original version of an Exorcist prequel, execs decided to take a sharp U-turn. Enter Renny Harlin , director of such cinematic debacles as Cutthroat Island, Driven and the recently released and long-shelved Mindhunters. Although it has been a while, Harlin had commercial success with Deep Blue Sea, Cliffhanger and Die Hard 2 and the powers hoped he could pull it off again.Harlin wasn't too thrilled about simply reworking Schrader's version. Somehow, he convinced WB to let him re-shoot and recast the main parts , outside of Stellan Skarsgard in the lead. The script also got a retooling , and soon Harlin was on his way to Rome to shoot his version of an Exorcist prequel. Although Harlin would claim his version to be quite different and Schrader would later campaign to allow his version to have a release, the two films are remarkably similar. The basic plotline is identical and, except for a few changes in the way the story plays itself out, the end result is the same.Next up we'll go through some points of the two films and compare and contrast:As stated above, the basic storyline is the same. Schrader's version opens with a terrific Holocaust sequence that turns out to be the strongest scene of either film. In Harlin's version, a very similar sequence is shown in random flashbacks. Harlin's take on these scenes possess none of the same intensity, despite a feeble attempt at shock value by portraying a young girl shot in the head by an evil Nazi. In the long run, the set-up for the story is the same: Merrin is a former priest who has lost his faith and become an archeologist. While on a dig in British East Africa, Merrin stumbles upon an ancient Byzantine church, perfectly preserved underground. During the excavation of the town, strange happenings occur that may indicate the church possesses an evil. In Schrader's version, Father Francis (James D'Arcy in Beginning and Gabriel Mann in Dominion) is brought in to oversee the dig and assure that the religious aspects of the process are being adhered to. In the Harlin film, Francis is there from the start, but he is hiding secretive information about the church. In the Schrader version, a local boy named Chece (Billy Crawford) shows up in the town in need of medical attention. This boy will ultimately be the vehicle for demonic possession. In Harlin's, a young boy of one of the local townspeople will show the first signs of possession, but this is a diversion so that we don't suspect the actual vessel, Doctor Sarah (Izabella Scorupco). Sarah is also the semi-love interest to Merrin. In Schrader's version, Clara Bellar plays this part, called Nurse Rachel here, but she's never possessed and her attraction to Merrin is more subtle. Merrin must stand up to the evil and through this he rediscovers his faith.