Let's just get one thing straight off the bat: I do not find The Exorcist scary in the least, and I'm getting pretty damn tired of being insulted for it. As if the people who aren't scared by "The Exorcist" and either immature, have no imagination and/or are completely dead inside, and we are adviced to go back and watch teen slasher flicks instead, since that's apparently "our type of films". Not everything is black and white, folks. I should know, I'm the king of the gray area.
Personally, I absolutely detest "Scream", "I Know What You Did Last Summer", "Urban Legends" and all of that mind-less, commercial, so-called horror movie crap. Just because "The Exorcist" doesn't scare me, doesn't mean I need half-naked teens with surgically enlarged bodyparts, knife-wielding murderers in raincoats, and tons of splatter and gore to please me. Nothing irks me more than barely dressed bimbos and there is nothing scary about blood and guts, to be honest it bores me to no end. Unless of course it's done deliberately OTT and tongue-in-cheek, like in "Braindead" and "Evil Dead 2", then it's absolutely hilarious.
Another argument often used is that we can't appreciate older films. That's a bunch of crap. Out of my collection of over 6.000 DVD's and VHS tapes, 85% of the movies were produced between 1920 and 1975, and over half of them were made in the 50's and 60's. Just because a film is old, doesn't mean it can't be scary. The scene in "Psycho" where Lila is sneaking around the Bates manor whilst Norman is in the motel only a few yards away down the hill always puts me on the edge of my seat. Or how about the horrific murders in "Peeping Tom"? Not to mention the slow-moving and ever-growing number of zombies in "Night Of The Living Dead", which still freak me out. And these are all movies that were made before I was born. Let's not forget the grainy, shadowy, high-contrast footage of Count Orloc in "Nosferatu". My grandparents weren't even born when FW Murnau made that one, and it's still one of the most frightening piece of cinema I have ever laid my beautiful blue eyes on.
Maybe I would find "The Exorcist" more frightening if I was religious. If I was catholic, I'm sure I would soil myself silly. But then again, many reviewers have said you need not to believe in God and the devil to be scared. Come to think of it, I don't believe in zombies and vampires either, but I still find them scary if it's done the right way, so I really don't know. All I know is, this film is not scary to me.
In my opinion, the Japanese and the Korean have totally taken over the horror genre, with films such as "The Eye", "Ring" (yes, I liked it better than the remake, feel free to send private messages explaining to me why I am a complete idiot - I promise to delete them as soon as I spot them), "Audition" (which admittedly was more of a psychological thriller), "Dark Water", "Kaïro" and "Ju-On". If I may say so, there hasn't been a truly scary, unsettling American horror/thriller since "Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer". "Se7en" had it's moments, and "Silence Of The Lambs" was kinda creepy towards the end with Buffalo Bill watching Clarice through the nightvision goggles, but the main reason I return to those two films over and over again is the tight story, the claustrophobic cinematography and the wonderful performances. Whether they're scary or not comes in second to me. Which is exactly my point (betcha didn't think I had one).
Alright, enough nagging. To round this review off on a positive note, "The Exorcist" a great movie. The whole setup and the perfectly balanced structure of the film make it a joy to watch. The opening sequence with Father Merrin (the majestic Max Von Sydow) in Iraq is superb in so many ways. Not much is said (and when something IS said, it's in Arabic), instead Friedkin devotes the first 10-15 minutes of the film to haunting images and music as a way to get us inside the head, or rather the heart, of Father Merrin. Then he disappears from the film for a good hour or so, and the focus changes to the parallel storylines of the torn Father Karras and his aging mother, and Chris McNeil (Ellen Burstyn) and her 12-year old daughter (Linda Blair), until these three stories finally meet under horrific circumstances. Unfortunately, this pace and rhythm is completely destroyed in "The Version You've Never Seen", where additional (and superfluous) scenes have been added. Sure, the spider-walk scene and all that is interesting to see from a nerdy cineast POV, but they add very little, if anything, to the film. I would suggest to anyone who hasn't seen "The Exorcist" to firstly see the original 1973 version, and then move on to the aforementioned, newer version for it's trivia value, for that is the only value that version has.
The performances are great through out, in particular Von Sydow (who is always great, even in the suckiest of films), and Ellen Burstyn. The cinematography and the set design are flawless, especially Regan's room during the actual exorcism. And of course Mike Oldfield's haunting music. Sure, the special effects have dated and look cheap, but that has never gotten in the way of good storytelling.
I really like The Exorcist. I would even go as far as saying I love it, I've seen it fourteen times and I'm looking forward to the fifteenth. But I wouldn't call it a horror film. To me, it's always been a drama. But it's a damn fine drama, that's for sure.
8.5/10
Personally, I absolutely detest "Scream", "I Know What You Did Last Summer", "Urban Legends" and all of that mind-less, commercial, so-called horror movie crap. Just because "The Exorcist" doesn't scare me, doesn't mean I need half-naked teens with surgically enlarged bodyparts, knife-wielding murderers in raincoats, and tons of splatter and gore to please me. Nothing irks me more than barely dressed bimbos and there is nothing scary about blood and guts, to be honest it bores me to no end. Unless of course it's done deliberately OTT and tongue-in-cheek, like in "Braindead" and "Evil Dead 2", then it's absolutely hilarious.
Another argument often used is that we can't appreciate older films. That's a bunch of crap. Out of my collection of over 6.000 DVD's and VHS tapes, 85% of the movies were produced between 1920 and 1975, and over half of them were made in the 50's and 60's. Just because a film is old, doesn't mean it can't be scary. The scene in "Psycho" where Lila is sneaking around the Bates manor whilst Norman is in the motel only a few yards away down the hill always puts me on the edge of my seat. Or how about the horrific murders in "Peeping Tom"? Not to mention the slow-moving and ever-growing number of zombies in "Night Of The Living Dead", which still freak me out. And these are all movies that were made before I was born. Let's not forget the grainy, shadowy, high-contrast footage of Count Orloc in "Nosferatu". My grandparents weren't even born when FW Murnau made that one, and it's still one of the most frightening piece of cinema I have ever laid my beautiful blue eyes on.
Maybe I would find "The Exorcist" more frightening if I was religious. If I was catholic, I'm sure I would soil myself silly. But then again, many reviewers have said you need not to believe in God and the devil to be scared. Come to think of it, I don't believe in zombies and vampires either, but I still find them scary if it's done the right way, so I really don't know. All I know is, this film is not scary to me.
In my opinion, the Japanese and the Korean have totally taken over the horror genre, with films such as "The Eye", "Ring" (yes, I liked it better than the remake, feel free to send private messages explaining to me why I am a complete idiot - I promise to delete them as soon as I spot them), "Audition" (which admittedly was more of a psychological thriller), "Dark Water", "Kaïro" and "Ju-On". If I may say so, there hasn't been a truly scary, unsettling American horror/thriller since "Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer". "Se7en" had it's moments, and "Silence Of The Lambs" was kinda creepy towards the end with Buffalo Bill watching Clarice through the nightvision goggles, but the main reason I return to those two films over and over again is the tight story, the claustrophobic cinematography and the wonderful performances. Whether they're scary or not comes in second to me. Which is exactly my point (betcha didn't think I had one).
Alright, enough nagging. To round this review off on a positive note, "The Exorcist" a great movie. The whole setup and the perfectly balanced structure of the film make it a joy to watch. The opening sequence with Father Merrin (the majestic Max Von Sydow) in Iraq is superb in so many ways. Not much is said (and when something IS said, it's in Arabic), instead Friedkin devotes the first 10-15 minutes of the film to haunting images and music as a way to get us inside the head, or rather the heart, of Father Merrin. Then he disappears from the film for a good hour or so, and the focus changes to the parallel storylines of the torn Father Karras and his aging mother, and Chris McNeil (Ellen Burstyn) and her 12-year old daughter (Linda Blair), until these three stories finally meet under horrific circumstances. Unfortunately, this pace and rhythm is completely destroyed in "The Version You've Never Seen", where additional (and superfluous) scenes have been added. Sure, the spider-walk scene and all that is interesting to see from a nerdy cineast POV, but they add very little, if anything, to the film. I would suggest to anyone who hasn't seen "The Exorcist" to firstly see the original 1973 version, and then move on to the aforementioned, newer version for it's trivia value, for that is the only value that version has.
The performances are great through out, in particular Von Sydow (who is always great, even in the suckiest of films), and Ellen Burstyn. The cinematography and the set design are flawless, especially Regan's room during the actual exorcism. And of course Mike Oldfield's haunting music. Sure, the special effects have dated and look cheap, but that has never gotten in the way of good storytelling.
I really like The Exorcist. I would even go as far as saying I love it, I've seen it fourteen times and I'm looking forward to the fifteenth. But I wouldn't call it a horror film. To me, it's always been a drama. But it's a damn fine drama, that's for sure.
8.5/10