In 1973, “The Exorcist” terrified audiences with scenes of a girl’s head turning backwards, green projectile vomiting, demonic voices, and a seemingly out-of-his-depth Catholic priest.

Several spinoffs, including movies and a television series starring Geena Davis, have since spawned from the original, with varying degrees of success.

Now, David Gordon Green’s “The Exorcist: Believer” is the latest offering in the franchise, promising twice the horror with a case of double possession.

Could this film finally break the curse of shoddy sequels? The answer is a screaming “hell, no!”

Even Ellen Burstyn, who reprises her role as Chris MacNeil, cannot save this befuddled, horrorless – and, dare we say, pointless – horror flick. Which is too bad, as there is a lot of potential in its premise.

So, what’s it about? Angela Fielding and her friend, Katherine, enter the woods one day after school and don’t come out for three days.

After being discovered in a stable, they start exhibiting symptoms of possession, prompting single parent Victor Fielding (Leslie Odom Jr) to reach out to MacNeil in an effort to save his daughter.

The opening scene hints at a possible encounter with forces of the underworld later on, while the measured pacing leads one to assume this is all a setup for a bloodcurdling, high-octane second half.

Alas. Clocking in at 111 minutes, any sign of demonic possession only starts to surface closer to the one-hour mark.

The first problem here is that “The Exorcist: Believer” lacks context. There is no real reason for the possession, aside from the fact that the girls entered the woods and tried talking to the dead.

And even then, Green chooses not to show what exactly happened when the girls dabbled with the paranormal.

Then there’s that issue of pointlessness: why bring Chris MacNeil back if all she does is utter a few lines about possessions, before thereafter being rendered ineffective after a brief encounter with one of the girls?

Much anticipation is built up for her arrival, and it is even suggested she might be the one to banish the demons to hell. Yes, a good old-fashioned battle between old foes seemed afoot – but this, too, is disappointingly cut short.

The film also takes itself too seriously, and as a result becomes mired in a meaningless plot in an effort to carve out a niche in the “Exorcist” canon.

Ultimately, though, the biggest weakness with “Believer” is that it doesn’t have enough terrifying moments. What works well in outings like “The Conjuring” and “Paranormal Activity” is a gradual introduction to the dark force, building up to a terrifying confrontation.

This is severely lacking here, which, consequently, begs the question: why make it in the first place? Like the supernatural, some things are better left alone.

To its credit, there are some really impressive moments. One scene takes place in the supernatural realm, briefly, giving audiences cursory snapshots of evil forces.

In another, the fragility of a father-daughter relationship – the heart of the movie – and the death of a loved one are explored. These moments, however, are few and far between.

All in all, like the demons of hell, “The Exorcist: Believer” should have been locked up, never to be seen in our world.

And because it wasn’t, it might make you more of a sceptic than a believer in horror movies.

As of press time, ‘The Exorcist: Believer’ is screening in cinemas nationwide.