effects are still pretty good to me, the makeup and burfing. there are images so disturbing that they stick in your head. it’s one of rare films that can do psycological damage.
True. You have to either be deranged or a glutton for punishment to watch this movie too many times. I thought the way Friedkin tied the story into history was fascinating, giving it a supernatural depth not often seen in horror movies.
“You have to either be deranged or a glutton for punishment to watch this movie too many times.”
Guilty. Haven’t seen it for a few years though, scared the hell out of me back in the day. In terms of horror films, there are better ones out there, but you can’t beat Von Sydow nor the wonderful soundtrack.
it never ceases to amaze me that some thirty eight years after its original theatrical release, horror filmmakers are still desperately chasing director William Friedkin legacy, each one failing to deliver.
why does it continue to resonate all these years later? How, in an age of CG magic and seamless practical effects, can a horror flick from the early ’70s leave such lasting scars?
I doubt there is anything better in genre, The Exorcist proves itself a timeless tour de force.
The Exorcist is what i’d call a dramatic horror film. the reason it works is because the characters are well developed, we identity and relate to them as people, and therefore have an emotional insvestment in their respective fates. soemthing that cannot be said for most horror in general.
secondly, it’s a beautifully shot film wtih incredible interior lighting. it’s just great to look at.
I agree with Joks, it is a dramatic horror film. story isn’t just about a distraught mother and her possessed child, it’s about a man struggling with a crisis of faith, a wise sage’s willingness to reenter the veritable lion’s den and the inexplicable victimization of an innocent.
The Exorcist is a tour de force. The problem with so many horror films as they are aimed expressly at young teenagers. The Exorcist was made with adults in mind. Thematically it is a film that plays right into our deepest fears and as you say Joks, the lighting is incredible. What makes the film work in my mind is the compelling theatrical quality to the production. Virtually all of the action is confined to Regan’s bedroom.
I guess Spielberg tried to capture some of this quality in Poltergeist, but as with all his movies he simply can’t contain himself and plays it more for effect than any deep seated psychological horror.
The Omen was pretty good too.
The problem with Poltergeist is that, by using the child’s point of view, it often slides towards the funny side of horror, making it a less “serious” film. The Exorcist focuses on the mother and father Karras, their psychological battle with the evil and the shock created by the devil manifesting itself through the body of a child. I don’t find The Exorcist as being a particularly horrifying or scary film. I love it because it carries the horror into the common citizen’s life, building an intense drama from there, with really believable characters and their reactions. The first sequences in Iraq are just masterful in building the tension for what will occur later in the US.
Has anyone seen the Rite?
I found this film faintly disturbing as a teenager, but it loses its fascination with age. It seems to think it is making some terribly important statement about EVIL, but it never really gets around to actually making one, for all the pea soup and levitation. Just not terribly interesting, frankly, but noteworthy for the way it managed to enter the popular consciousness.
The pea soup and levitation were probably the least compelling aspects. There was an earnestness to the film, but I didn’t find it trite. As Carlos noted, it was more about projecting a mother’s worst fear of her daughter (or son) being possessed by some evil spirit, and Father Karras trying to come to terms with this evil, which obviously had a strong hold on him as him. I thought the movie was very effective in this regard.
The Exorcist 2 is on cable right now.
It’s still funny, even after all these years.
Dominion is scarier than Exorcist. Neither is scary per say. The only movie I ever found sort of scary is Night of the Hunter.
The fact is that The Exorcist feels more real than any of the horror mockumentaries we’ve seen in these past few years. Those characters live and breathe authenticity (Friedkin showed that same talent for realistic portrayal of characters in The French Connection) and, at least to me, that’s the great strength of the film.
“Could you help an old altar boy, father?”
I love this movie & have watched it several times…and went to see “the version I’d never seen before” in the theatre…A lot of critics lambasted it when it came out…is it HIGH art? Probably not…but it will scare the #!&! out of you!
Exorcist is a mainstream camp film, of the horror department…and it delivers. Hell yeah it looks mild compared to today’s standards but that’s what makes it so fun! It’s a pity that there aren’t many Hollywood folks like Friedkin who wouldn’t be taking the material so seriously and instead would plunge religious gibber and some immigrant Greekness for an exquisite train ride! I may sound contemptuous but those are actually positive sentiments and on top of that, I really admire Burstyn who’s almost always great in anything.
I wonder though……how did this really interesting Hollywood folk heavily declined in the years to come after a string of successes from late 60’s to mid-80’s?
ah man the Exorcist still freaks me out but not because of the bedroom scene , but because of the subliminal images and captain Howdy face that pops up in the priests dream and at other points in the film, it always catches me out.
The late 60s and early 70s was a great period in Hollywood. Guys like Friedkin, Coppola and even Lucas were doing some very interesting things, essentially reinventing movies. Sadly, it all became just as quickly commercial again.
the Exorcist compared to todays standards is miles better than hundreds of horror films I’ve seen in last ten years. be it storytelling, special effects, atmosphere, shock value or any one of the elusive elements that transform a horror film into a horror classic :))))
the film’s methodical approach to what might otherwise be a derivative, schlocky tale of good versus evil. Blatty taps into the mundane aspects of everyday life and, like every great horror maestro before and after him, places a small group of flawed but relatable protagonists into truly terrifying circumstances, unspeakable horrors that bend and break anyone and everyone unfortunate enough to be caught in Evil’s snare.
it’s tough to name a single standout from the last four decades that bests Friedkin and Blatty’s macabre masterpiece on every front. Owen Roizman’s deceptively simple, utterly haunting cinematography. Steve Boeddeker’s unnerving score. film’s unexpected yet flawless casting. Jason Miller’s raw but restrained performance. sweet, little Linda Blair’s mangled, unholy face. Ellen Burstyn’s unhinged terror. Blatty’s searing screenplay. Pazuzu and its ungodly mindgames. Friedkin’s sharp eye and steady hand at the helm.
I love this film and make no mistake, The Exorcist is a perfect genre storm.
“The Exorcist” is one of the very few films that I call absolutely perfect. Picture perfect. Not a single flaw. A masterpiece of the highest caliber.
“Picture perfect. Not a single flaw. A masterpiece of the highest caliber.”
Ummmm, picture perfect? Not really…perfect as a genre film yes, but not even Friedkin’s French Connection is perfect. The director always plays a significant role in the final tally and I’ll need at least a decalogue of arguments to see Exorcist as a 6 star film.
If Exorcist is picture perfect, then Pink Flamingos is 200% perfect.
I’m still too scared to watch it.
“If Exorcist is picture perfect, then Pink Flamingos is 200% perfect.”
not only is Pink Flam 200 percent perfect it also may be scarier than Exorcist!
In very general terms: the acting is powerful; the sound design is second to none; the music is haunting; the cinematography is a masterpiece of naturalism, but not quite documentary realism; the editing is seamless and functional; the special effects are groundbreaking; the script is top-notch; the directing is sublime in execution.
This was all said earlier and it’s way too general but you can’t really gush about this film unless you want to write an essay on it. As a genre film it transcends. As a model of classical Hollywood construction it doesn’t get any better. For me it is the definition of a masterpiece: endlessly repeatable, endlessly enjoyable.
I haven’t seen this in a while, but this is one of the scariest films I’ve seen (although I saw it for the first time when I was in the 11 or 12). Not sure if I’d call this a masterpiece, but I can understand why people would say this. I’d say it’s one of the best horror films. The only other horror film that comes close to this is the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, imo.
As for masterpieces in the horror genre, I’d be more apt to choose Psycho over this.
“Psycho” is almost in a different category above and beyond the horror film. It’s an icon. “The Exorcist” might just be the better film though. Maybe I wouldn’t call “Psycho” flawless.
I would chose Blood Feast and Night of the Living Dead over both.
“Night of the Living Dead” is a curiosity. Important for historical reasons but not a great film on the level of some of the others we’re talking about.
I very much disagree
it has a great racial subtext, good location use that creates real tension and well drawn characters.
there is a relevance to it more than just killing off a hollywood lead in the first third or having a 12 year old say icky things.
Plus it is part of a great series of films so it has a real sense of epic about it, grown over time.
Dzimas
All the recent interest in horror films made me think back to The Exorcist, arguably the most horrific film ever made. This movie took Rosemary’s Baby and upped it about 10 notches.
There was an obsession with the occult in the late 60s and early 70s. The Exorcist premiered after Christmas in 1973, drawing long lines at movie theaters around the country. There were few multiplexes back then so a movie like this became an event, playing for weeks at the movie theater.
I saw it not so long ago and the movie holds up well. The effects certainly don’t come near the CGI we see today, but the theme, the lighting and the excellent cast still make for spine tingling moments.