Horror fans, start clearing your calendars now. The next couple of years are shaping up to be a genuinely stacked season for scary movies, and the headliner is a big one: Scarlett Johansson is stepping behind the camera for a new chapter in The Exorcist franchise. Yes, that Exorcist.
Johansson directing a possession movie is the kind of left-field hiring that makes Hollywood interesting. She's spent decades in front of the camera in everything from indie dramas to Marvel blockbusters, and now she's taking on one of the most sacred texts in the horror canon. The original 1973 film, directed by William Friedkin, remains the benchmark that every possession movie since has been measured against - and most have come up short.
Why the original still casts such a long shadow
It's worth remembering what made Friedkin's film such a cultural earthquake. The premise is deceptively simple: a young girl named Regan MacNeil starts behaving strangely, and her mother, Chris, played by Ellen Burstyn, exhausts every medical explanation before turning to two Catholic priests, Father Damien Karras (Jason Miller) and the elderly Father Lankester Merrin (Max von Sydow), to save her daughter's life. That's it. No convoluted mythology, no sprawling universe - just a mother, a child, and a fight for a soul.
Released on December 26, 1973, the film ran 122 minutes and terrified audiences so thoroughly that it became a phenomenon rather than just a movie. Linda Blair's performance as Regan turned her into a horror icon overnight, and Max von Sydow's weary, haunted Merrin gave the film its spiritual weight. Lee J. Cobb's Lt. Bill Kinderman and William O'Malley's Father Dyer rounded out a cast that felt lived-in rather than cast for shock value. The movie holds a 7.749 out of 10 rating on TMDb - a remarkably sturdy score for a film that's now more than half a century old and has been imitated endlessly.
The new film has serious shoes to fill, and Johansson knows it. The smart play for any filmmaker tackling this material is to remember that the original worked because it was about people first and demons second.
The rest of the horror slate is no slouch either
Johansson's Exorcist project isn't arriving in a vacuum. Studios have clearly decided that fear sells, and the coming months are packed with high-profile horror bets. The genre has been on a remarkable run, blending prestige talent with genuinely unsettling material, and the pipeline shows no sign of slowing down.
What makes this moment interesting is the mix of approaches. You've got legacy titles being reimagined by unexpected filmmakers, original horror concepts landing with major stars attached, and a steady stream of mid-budget scare fests that prove you don't need a nine-figure budget to get audiences into seats. The lesson of the past few years is that horror remains one of the few genres where a fresh voice and a strong concept can compete with franchise muscle.
For The Exorcist specifically, the franchise has had a rocky road in recent decades. Previous attempts to extend the story have met with mixed receptions from critics and fans alike, which puts extra pressure on this new installment to justify its existence. Johansson's involvement is a genuine signal of intent - she's not the obvious choice, and that's precisely why it might work.
What to watch for
Details on the new film are still trickling out, so expect casting news and a release window to firm up in the months ahead. In the meantime, the smart move for anyone feeling the hype is a rewatch of the 1973 original. It's a masterclass in building dread through silence, shadow, and performance rather than gore - and it's a useful reminder of the standard Johansson is now working against.
Heresy? Maybe. But horror has always rewarded a little blasphemy, and the genre's current golden age shows no signs of burning out. Between the Exorcist revival and the broader slate of scares heading our way, the next stretch of Hollywood horror looks like one long, sleepless night - in the best possible way.
Source: extratv.com
