Mike
18Apr12
Pretty sure you're misinformed, considering The Exorcist was one of the films Kubrick screened for the cast and crew of The Shining.
I absolutely loathed this on a first viewing, and while I didn't love it second time round, I can acknowledge the love that people have for it. Not 'the scariest film ever made' as most deem it to be, but there is definitely something in it for every film fan. Not a great film, but something everyone should see.
Kubrick might have been dead wrong about Chaplin, but he was spot on about The Exorcist, calling it garbage.
What can be said that has not already been expressly stated? This is, without a doubt, the scariest film of all time.
In my opinion, the first half was masterful. I was intrigued, truley frightened, and even intellectually stimulated. Unfortunately I felt that the second half, while it did have its moments) didn't work as well. Less was left to the imagination, and it became harder to believe. Furthermore, the special effects and make up just didn't hold up as well and it just went over the top. Oh well, still very good overall.
A well-enough made film, but it's undone by the sensatioalism with which it handles a subject matter it says (via Friedkin on the Blu-ray commentary) it wants to take so seriously. The only time it has integrity is when the wonderful Max von Sydow is on screen.
Boring as hell. Maybe christian fantasy just isn't very compelling unless you believe in it... Do shaking beds and subliminal clown faces really upset people that much? Of course a horror film needn't be plausible, but the people who made the film appear to assume we will be interested in the subject beforehand; it meanders endlessly until the exorcism scene, which is good but not enough to make this worthwhile.
i recently rewatched this for the first time since highschool. it was less scary, but a better made film than i remember it being. also, was there a brief cameo by Lino Ventura in the beginning? i could have sworn that was him!
Pulpy as hell and pure popcorn, and yet it stands up well as a piece of art (or at least a very strong film). Its reputation as the "scariest movie of all-time" that precedes it sometimes makes it hard for first time viewers to fully get what makes it a big deal. Friedkin balances material that could easily become campy (see the spoof 'Repossesed') and makes it terrifying by approaching the material with sincerity.
There are so many things that I love about this movie. I love the obedience, as well as the disobedience, to its genre conventions. I love the appropriateness of Max von Sydow as the distinguished exorcist. It's still a completely disturbing movie, as I'm sure it was in '73. What do we find so terrifying about these demonic stories? Why are we scared by something that we normally find hard (or impossible) to believe?
Unforgettable classic. Everyone remembers the pea soup, the head spinning, the child's face, the spider walk and the vulgarities! To me, this movie delivers psychological demons elements which are much more effective than overdone makeup jobs or meaningless startle scenes. This movie traumatized me.
A incredible film that is now almost 40 years old. When viewing films people need to view them from the standpoint at the time. It may not shock people now but in 1973 i can imagine the shock value, a all time classice
any real creepiness dissipates once Blair turns into the full make-up, soup spewing, swearing mess. good, but with a disappointing ending. the spiderwalk did catch me totally off-guard though.
Incredible horror film where every minute detail is planned and a flawless story. Listening to Friedkin's commentary on a second viewing adds another fascinating layer to an already intricate work.
I was laughing at times i think i was supposed to be scared...i'm just not scared by horror films.
This movie truly is one of the best horror movies out there. Go watch it, you won't regret it! 5/5
nothing as great as the hype created, there are many other films highly more horror in content and engaging in the narration.