The Exorcist

[Nietzsche]

Is the original novel any good? How does it compare to the movie? Are there any significant differences in the events?

Are any of Blatty's other novels good?

[dfloyd]

Because that is what it will be.

[Jozanny]

From my limited understanding of the history of the production of the film, and I was on the periphery of it, as they were going to hire me as an extra because of my doe-eyed disabled face, take the film over the book. Without jump cuts, which are necessary on commercial tv, the film truly horrifies the viewer, and is the real thing when it comes to cult classics. The book is not badly written, but is no match for the celluloid.

[mono]

Is the original novel any good? How does it compare to the movie? Are there any significant differences in the events?

Are any of Blatty's other novels good?
Even though Blatty wrote the screenplay himself, the movie in no way compares quality-wise to the book, as usually seems the case, but I consider it an extreme case with this novel/film. He won some fairly prominent awards for the film, well-deserved ones, but the film left out a lot, likely both for the purposes of not making the film many hours long and for limiting its disturbing attributes (especially considering we speak of the 1970's); I thought the movie quite unsettling, until I read the book, whose details made me cringe.
Worth reading? Yes. Better than the film? Yes.
For your last question, I apologize, I have read nothing else by Blatty.

If you have time to waste, read the Exorcist.
Because that is what it will be.
Personally, I would not trade the whole week it took me to read The Exorcist for the couple of hours of the film, but I guess I prefer the original to the secondary, and less the couch-potato lifestyle.