The scene where Regan's thrashing around on the bed, and smacks herself hard in the face is harrowing.
My favorite scene in the movie is with the mother and the doctors outside her room. The doctors don't have a clue what's wrong with Regan, and the mother is at the end of her tether with distress. The doctors try and rationalize her behavior by saying it's a pathological state,
Mother- So what's wrong with her?
Doctor- We still think it's the temporal lobe!
Mother- Oh what are you talking about for chrissakes, did you see her or NOT!! she's acting like she's out of her MIND!!
I think 'The Exorcist' is a bit of both - a classic horror and a bit dated and camp! The problem with viewing 'The Exorcist' for the first time now is that the key scenes have been parodied, put on generic 'Scariest Horror Film Moments' TV shows and ripped off by countless other films about demonic possession/exorcism so many times that it can be difficult for it to have the same impact it did in the 70s when the scary parts weren't quite so ubiquitous.
I can certainly understand why someone would think that the special effects/demon voice are a little dated and camp nowadays - they are 40 years old after all! Nonetheless, I still think it's a very well-crafted horror film that still stands up today even if it isn't necessarily going to terrify everyone like it may have done in 1973.
I always though the only thing the film lacked was a decent
canned laughter track all through? When the entity first arrives
you hear a sound like a lion roaring in the attic,and the bloke
who is the caretaker/building superintendant says 'Sounds
like mice in the attic...'!
I found the book to be much better,although ponderously written
and condescending,(assuming the reader to be not very bright)
but the film was just hilarious.
A good nights viewing for a comedy double bill,with 'Carry On
Screaming'!
I always though the only thing the film lacked was a decent
canned laughter track all through? When the entity first arrives
you hear a sound like a lion roaring in the attic,and the bloke
who is the caretaker/building superintendant says 'Sounds
like mice in the attic...'!
I found the book to be much better,although ponderously written
and condescending,(assuming the reader to be not very bright)
but the film was just hilarious.
A good nights viewing for a comedy double bill,with 'Carry On
Screaming'!
Ok well what horror films do you consider excellent then?
I think it's one of the most hilarious ridiculous films i have seen
If i had been around and watched it at the time of it's original release, maybe then my opinion would be very different
I don't think you have to either be religious or believe in the occult/demons etc to enjoy and appreciate the movie.
I am not religious and an avowed skeptic., yet I still found the film quite powerful.
And despite the 'true story' it is supposed to be based on, I still don't believe any of it.
I enjoy the movie in the same way I can enjoy sci fi and fantasy movies, and I certainly don't need to believe in life on other planets or mythical creatures to enjoy those movies.
Just the DS 'atheists', I'm afraid.
You don't get anyone saying that there are no talking scarecrows as a criticism of The Wizard of Oz and nobody prefaces an opinion of Star Wars by mentioning the physical impossibility of light sabres but some people feel compelled to insert a snide remark about religion into any mention of a film that deals with it, however slightly.
Have a look on the Noah thread for further evidence.
There are some aspects of The Exorcist that haven't dated particularly well but overall it does develop a sense of all-prevailing menace that very few other films have done.
I do think it is a great film, but with the inevitability that certain (minor) things do jar in the modern context. This isn't the same problem as with, say Frankenstein or Dracula from the 30's, as their whole filmic 'aura' is so identifiably old-fashioned as for it to be fruitless to home in on singular aspects such as special effects etc standing out as 'dated'. The trouble in this regard with The Exorcist is that in the way it is shot - in terms of camerawork, editing, all those technical regards - and acted, it still very much feels a 'modern' film, so you can plausibly watch in that mindset, but then occasional silly things, like the head-spin, do take you out of that for the moment. I also just don't think the demon's 'voice' works - I just can't connect it with coming out of the mouth it supposedly belongs to - but that doesn't spoil the overall effect.
Personally I fall between the two stools of the extended cut and the original as to which is more effective. Both have their merits and distractions. I feel some of what was left out of the original cut should have stayed - crucially Regan's first examination, which makes such a continuity difference - the dialogue between Karras and Merrin on the stairs, and personally I like the extended ending, although I can appreciate why it could be deemed to have no impact one way or the other. In the extended cut however, the new opening shot of the street is completely unnecessary - and so obviously not original footage - the 'subliminal' flashes are far from subliminal and are distracting, and the spiderwalk would have been a valid inclusion - if they'd not speeded it up and added that horrendous(ly unconvincing) CGI blood. The original sequence was far more creepy, if incomplete, but they could easily have got around that with an early fade.
All in all I'd say it was a genuine classic but that, like many, still has its flaws.
I think the posters who claim to find the film amusing , are talking rubbish.
I bet they were absolutely terrified, and are just claiming the opposite to appear cool and impress their peers, partners etc
I think the posters who claim to find the film amusing , are talking rubbish.
I bet they were absolutely terrified, and are just claiming the opposite to appear cool and impress their peers, partners etc
I suppose you think that everyone thinks and acts like you? Well, unfortunately, people who are not you can be totally different and react to things in a different way. What a revelation that must be!
However, the above isn't to say that I agree with the naysayers, for I don't. I really do like this film, but rather than find it scary, I find it more emotional and distressing (in the sense of immersing yourself into the characters), as well as moving. It's not just a horror film, it's much more (not that horror as a whole is just horror, for there are many horror films out there that transcend the genre). Also, it's really well made and with some great performances. Even as an atheist, this film still moves me.
BTW, Grabid Rannies raises up some good points, particularly the thing about the head spinning. I really think that the film didn't really need those effects to convey its story and its impact. In many ways, I can see why some actually laugh about that scene, because it sort of does take you out of the film if you allow it to, especially since the film is actually fairly serious in its nature and that scene is so far out. I let it go and just get on with the film, but I do feel that it wasn't necessary. Unfortunately, that scene is the one that people tend to focus on, which is a bit of a pity for it's far more than that.
Well considering there's just been another thread about the new Star Wars movie, I don't think we need to turn to The Exorcist to point fingers at an example of 70's outdated camp.
The Exorcist does address issues around modern secular scepticism and the rationalist view of the world which elevates science above the supernatural. The movie attempts to suggest that there are forces which are simply outside human understanding and control. I do think that The Exorcist has more meaning if you do come from a religious background but that it works for most people anyway.
I have always found the voices the most disturbing aspect of the movie alongside the atmosphere of dread. The first time I saw it was 1977 and I still don't like watching it.
Well considering there's just been another thread about the new Star Wars movie, I don't think we need to turn to The Exorcist to point fingers at an example of 70's outdated camp.
haha! too right! Now there's a franchise that's been milked for all it's worth, yet, for all it's modern effects still feels like it belongs in another time.:D
I guess i can see why some people may think the voice of the demon ( Mercedes MacCambridge) might be a bit funny, however I found it very alarming when i saw the film in the cinema, it went right through me.
I also think it's interesting how many of the film's ardent critics don't understand certain scenes, and it seems like they didn't really pay enough attention to it.
One scene I think is often confusing to people, is just after the crucifix bit when the demon twists the head of the girl around and speaks in Burke Denning's voice, saying 'Do you know what she did....' to her mother. I've read many people laugh at this wondering why it speaks with an English accent all of a sudden. Well, what the demon is doing here is visually demonstrating what it has done to Burke's body before chucking him out the window. I find this so chilling a moment in the film, and it's also the indication of greatness if a film is so detailed and intricate, that people still find more in it later on.
Then 'they' would be wrong, in my case at least, I'm afraid.
Hard as it is seems to be to understand, some of us are just genuinely not scared of horror films, in particular The Exorcist.
It's not hard to understand. As a genre, and a platform for film technique, horror is fascinating. But the number that truly worked for me barely runs into double figures. Generally it benefits more from the viewers sensory response than intellectual (fear overriding the rational perhaps), so it's bound to be divisive.
And for all those it leaves cold it works the other way too. With some people you can tell them they're going to be watching a horror film and they put their hand over their mouth. Job done already. It's just how we are I suppose.
It's a very good film, in fact one of my all time favourites - helped massively by some fantastic acting by Ellen Burstyn and Linda Blair! Not a perfect film by any means. 1970s Carrie is also one of my all time favourites, and again the performance of Sissy Spacek remains magnificent, but the film itself is dated. I have enjoyed recent similar-ish films like The Conjuring and Insidious.
Yes i've heard people say this too. And not just teens, people in their 20's & 30's. Mind you these people are idiots and the reason i know this is because (at least the people who said this to me) thought that those woeful overrated Paranormal Activity films were better than most "classic" horror. Better than The Exorcist, Psycho, Halloween, The Omen, Poltergeist etc...
Absolute classic. There were some scenes that were cut out and then re-inserted for the video (Regan walking down the stairs like a crab) that were really scary.
All over the web are people discussing things and young teenagers popping in and saying it was funny. The most horror filled moment in film, for me, is the ice cream girl in Assault on Precinct 13 - and some always say it was the funniest thing ever.
Don't worry about it folks they are just trolling. Bear in mind that the biggest giveaway of a person lying/trolling is if you give them a rational argument and they reply with nothing to say except the good old 'I have a right to my opinion', 'Freedom of Speech', type statement, not any sensible reply at all.
I remember seeing it in Leicester Square when it first came out. The atmosphere in the cinema was quite extraordinary, not helped by a woman near the front standing up and screaming and then apparently fainting. Never known anything like it, before or since.
But I think its power to cow audiences has diminished severely over the years. When I saw it again many moons later in a mostly empty cinema for a double bill with Exorcist II, it was with my younger brother who was somewhat drunk at the time and just sat and giggled throughout both films. When I asked him afterward what he thought of it he said it was good, though disappointingly for him not very scary.
I recently asked my daughter if she'd seen it and she had on DVD. She just thought the whole thing was, in her words, "silly and not very believable". I guess the world has just got more cynical and less willing to suspend disbelief for things that go growl in the night. I know I now find it hard, if not impossible, to actually get scared simply watching a movie, The Exorcist included. Without any sort of belief in the supernatural it kinda undermines the whole thing, even though I still enjoy the film.
A while back I picked up a copy at a car boot for a quid.
When I got home, my missus wouldnt have it in the house.
She had seen it in the cinema when itfirst cameout.
Say what you like about it, but not many films have that effect.
Having said that, I crapped my pants when I recently saw the ventriloquist in the 1945 film " The Dead of Night"
Comments
My favorite scene in the movie is with the mother and the doctors outside her room. The doctors don't have a clue what's wrong with Regan, and the mother is at the end of her tether with distress. The doctors try and rationalize her behavior by saying it's a pathological state,
Mother- So what's wrong with her?
Doctor- We still think it's the temporal lobe!
Mother- Oh what are you talking about for chrissakes, did you see her or NOT!! she's acting like she's out of her MIND!!
beautiful scene.
I can certainly understand why someone would think that the special effects/demon voice are a little dated and camp nowadays - they are 40 years old after all! Nonetheless, I still think it's a very well-crafted horror film that still stands up today even if it isn't necessarily going to terrify everyone like it may have done in 1973.
canned laughter track all through? When the entity first arrives
you hear a sound like a lion roaring in the attic,and the bloke
who is the caretaker/building superintendant says 'Sounds
like mice in the attic...'!
I found the book to be much better,although ponderously written
and condescending,(assuming the reader to be not very bright)
but the film was just hilarious.
A good nights viewing for a comedy double bill,with 'Carry On
Screaming'!
Ok well what horror films do you consider excellent then?
Youth is a blunder
Just the DS 'atheists', I'm afraid.
You don't get anyone saying that there are no talking scarecrows as a criticism of The Wizard of Oz and nobody prefaces an opinion of Star Wars by mentioning the physical impossibility of light sabres but some people feel compelled to insert a snide remark about religion into any mention of a film that deals with it, however slightly.
Have a look on the Noah thread for further evidence.
There are some aspects of The Exorcist that haven't dated particularly well but overall it does develop a sense of all-prevailing menace that very few other films have done.
Personally I fall between the two stools of the extended cut and the original as to which is more effective. Both have their merits and distractions. I feel some of what was left out of the original cut should have stayed - crucially Regan's first examination, which makes such a continuity difference - the dialogue between Karras and Merrin on the stairs, and personally I like the extended ending, although I can appreciate why it could be deemed to have no impact one way or the other. In the extended cut however, the new opening shot of the street is completely unnecessary - and so obviously not original footage - the 'subliminal' flashes are far from subliminal and are distracting, and the spiderwalk would have been a valid inclusion - if they'd not speeded it up and added that horrendous(ly unconvincing) CGI blood. The original sequence was far more creepy, if incomplete, but they could easily have got around that with an early fade.
All in all I'd say it was a genuine classic but that, like many, still has its flaws.
I bet they were absolutely terrified, and are just claiming the opposite to appear cool and impress their peers, partners etc
I suppose you think that everyone thinks and acts like you? Well, unfortunately, people who are not you can be totally different and react to things in a different way. What a revelation that must be!
However, the above isn't to say that I agree with the naysayers, for I don't. I really do like this film, but rather than find it scary, I find it more emotional and distressing (in the sense of immersing yourself into the characters), as well as moving. It's not just a horror film, it's much more (not that horror as a whole is just horror, for there are many horror films out there that transcend the genre). Also, it's really well made and with some great performances. Even as an atheist, this film still moves me.
BTW, Grabid Rannies raises up some good points, particularly the thing about the head spinning. I really think that the film didn't really need those effects to convey its story and its impact. In many ways, I can see why some actually laugh about that scene, because it sort of does take you out of the film if you allow it to, especially since the film is actually fairly serious in its nature and that scene is so far out. I let it go and just get on with the film, but I do feel that it wasn't necessary. Unfortunately, that scene is the one that people tend to focus on, which is a bit of a pity for it's far more than that.
Scared to death? No but I nearly died laughing
I have always found the voices the most disturbing aspect of the movie alongside the atmosphere of dread. The first time I saw it was 1977 and I still don't like watching it.
Anyone who think I'm 'talking rubbish', I couldn't give a 4X.
No film can work its magic on everyone of course.......but they do say laughter is the first sign of fear ;-)
haha! too right! Now there's a franchise that's been milked for all it's worth, yet, for all it's modern effects still feels like it belongs in another time.:D
I also think it's interesting how many of the film's ardent critics don't understand certain scenes, and it seems like they didn't really pay enough attention to it.
One scene I think is often confusing to people, is just after the crucifix bit when the demon twists the head of the girl around and speaks in Burke Denning's voice, saying 'Do you know what she did....' to her mother. I've read many people laugh at this wondering why it speaks with an English accent all of a sudden. Well, what the demon is doing here is visually demonstrating what it has done to Burke's body before chucking him out the window. I find this so chilling a moment in the film, and it's also the indication of greatness if a film is so detailed and intricate, that people still find more in it later on.
Then 'they' would be wrong, in my case at least, I'm afraid.
Hard as it is seems to be to understand, some of us are just genuinely not scared of horror films, in particular The Exorcist.
And for all those it leaves cold it works the other way too. With some people you can tell them they're going to be watching a horror film and they put their hand over their mouth. Job done already. It's just how we are I suppose.
Numbskulls all of them. I just shook my head.
Not as good as Harry Potter, eh?
Don't worry about it folks they are just trolling. Bear in mind that the biggest giveaway of a person lying/trolling is if you give them a rational argument and they reply with nothing to say except the good old 'I have a right to my opinion', 'Freedom of Speech', type statement, not any sensible reply at all.
But I think its power to cow audiences has diminished severely over the years. When I saw it again many moons later in a mostly empty cinema for a double bill with Exorcist II, it was with my younger brother who was somewhat drunk at the time and just sat and giggled throughout both films. When I asked him afterward what he thought of it he said it was good, though disappointingly for him not very scary.
I recently asked my daughter if she'd seen it and she had on DVD. She just thought the whole thing was, in her words, "silly and not very believable". I guess the world has just got more cynical and less willing to suspend disbelief for things that go growl in the night. I know I now find it hard, if not impossible, to actually get scared simply watching a movie, The Exorcist included. Without any sort of belief in the supernatural it kinda undermines the whole thing, even though I still enjoy the film.
Regards
Mark
When I got home, my missus wouldnt have it in the house.
She had seen it in the cinema when itfirst cameout.
Say what you like about it, but not many films have that effect.
Having said that, I crapped my pants when I recently saw the ventriloquist in the 1945 film " The Dead of Night"