Post edited 7:59 AM – May 16, 2011 by granville1

---

When Morgan Creek demanded a Legion rewrite from Blatty, and mandated an exorcist/exorcism, Blatty responded by adding a new character to his Exorcist "cast": Father Paul Morning, Georgetown chaplain and experienced exorcist. As a Blatty fan, at first I excoriated MC for their rewrite demand, but at the same time found that I welcomed his creation of the Morning character, for the following reasons:

1. Morning turned out to be Blatty's "surrogate Merrin". Surprisingly Nicol Williamson's work as Morning added an "Exorcist" dimension and tone to the film and connected it to the original film and novel.

2. When William Friedkin filmed The Exorcist, he set up certain establishing shots for scenes and characters: for instance, in the Iraqi museum curator's office, before a word is spoken, we see the curator writing about the dig's finds in Arabic. Some of the finds are given a few seconds each on screen:  Merrin handles the finds. The wall clock pendulum stops.

And Blatty repeats this technique in Legion: in the Georgetown University president's office, before a word is spoken, we see objects on the president's desk, a book titled "Anzac Sonata" and pictures of the president's family and other items. The wall clock pendulum stops.

Moreover, Blatty repeats this technique in his introduction of Morning. Again, before any word is spoken – indeed, this scene is entirely wordless – we see tokens of Morning's simplicity and saintliness: pictures of his family, one of them perhaps of himself as an infant, his immaculately kept room, his orderly, clean washbasin, his holy images and two religious pamphlets, and a statue of St. Michael defeating Satan.

In Friedkin's film the camera, behind Merrin, follows him from the rear as he approaches a blacksmith's stall. In Blatty's film the camera follows Morning's shadow as it passes in front of another token of the old priest's saintliness: a simple wall hanging that reads, "What we give to the poor is what we take with us when we die". Not only does this suggest Friedkin's shot of Merrin. It also serves as a connector to Blatty's original story, as the "giving to the poor" sentiment also exists on a printed card that Damien Karras carries with him.

In this way, Blatty reminds us of the first novel and film, as well as establishes Morning's character by the use of a few eloquently silent brushstrokes.

3. Merrin crosses to his window, where he has been nursing an injured bird. He finds that the bird has inexplicably died. At that moment, his crucifix falls from the wall. The crucifix fall, along with the "omen" of the dead bird, are Morning's own "clock-stopping" moment. Morning picks up the fallen crucifix, only to find that it has mysteriously begun to bleed. At this, the moment of his realization that he will, like Merrin before him, "soon be facing an ancient enemy", Morning's attention is caught by a sudden gust of wind that tears through his open window. This is plausibly a reference to the "demonic wind" that whips up in Merrin's climactic "Pazuzu statue confrontation" in Iraq in the first film (Paul Schrader's prequel Dominion also invokes the demonic wind in the Holland square where Merrin/Skarsgaard is about to encounter the truly demonic). Immediately the sky goes dark and the darkness enters into Morning's room,  as the demonic wind continues to whistle.

4.  Just prior to the exorcism scene, Blatty gives us an intimate moment alone with Morning in a Georgetown chapel. Almost Gothic in structure and appointments, the small chapel suggests a Medieval ambience, where a holy priest seeks shelter from the ancient enemy who "seeks my lilfe". Morning – in the only spontaneous dialogue he is given – reflects on his situation of dire endangerment, murmuring, "… My life …" Morning, like Merrin before him, knows his enemy is near, lying in wait for the next battle.

5. The exorcism scene refers once again to the earlier narrative – "this time you will lose". The dead spirit of James Vennamun/the Gemnini Killer has now been completely displaced by the vengeful demon itself, who with total assurance tells Morning that the priest will "enter darkness" and lose this fight. Many have criticised the exorcism scene for its over-the-top theatrics, yet I wonder what else Blatty could have done, given MC's mandated constraints. It does help to keep in mind that the preternatural fire-outbreak, hissing serpents, the lightning and the floor-cracking display of Karras' soul crucified are all visionary in nature, and not to be taken literally. They function as "lenses" that reveal Karras' plight and the demon's strength. The really telling thing is that throughout these attacks and visions of Hell,  Morning/Williamson displays an unshakeable dignity.

6. The demon is strong enough to throw Morning up against the cell wall and roll him up to the ceiling, where the demon paranormally strips the flesh from the priest's body. After Lt. William Kinderman enters the cell, Morning falls from the ceiling, either dead or unconscious.

7. In a move unprecedented  in Blatty's Exorcist corpus, God Himself  is at last permitted a small salvific action: Morning miraculously begins to regain consciousness and then a ray of divine light penetrates the cell, giving the injured priest a last ounce of strength. The light moves across the floor to Morning's crucifix, thereby signalling an instruction to the priest: Morning grasps the crucifix and exhorts Karras to "Fight – fight him, Damien". This admonition, with God's help, is successful in momentarily breaking the demon's control, freeing Karras just long enough for him to shout to Kinderman the only solution to his predicament: "Shoot now, Bill – kill me now", which Lt. Bill Kinderman does, at last liberating Karras to receive the reward out of which he was cheated at the end of the original story (the original story strongly implies that Karras went to his heavenly reward, but the MC rewrite permitted Blatty to make Karras a prisoner of the vengeful demon immediately after his death at the foot of the Hitchock steps).

For these reasons, I developed first a grudging respect for this added-on character, and then a full-blown appreciation toward Blatty for having invented another precious creation of his own startling imaginativeness, thus adding another minor deity to his Exorcist pantheon, at the same time suggesting Merrin's heroic memory, as well as duplicating some of the original film's character-establishing techniques.

Yeah – I thought, that placed under such constraints by MC, Blatty still did a creditable job with Karras-Miller (luckiily Miller became available for the film so Blatty was able to bring him back as Karras), Morning, and the exorcism scene. The rewrite was probablly something of a rush job, but to me this only shows up in a couple of places, e.g., I would have wished that Kinderman and Morning could have had a conversation, that Morning could have had a bit more dialogue, and that the final graveside shot would firmly establish what was going on (some viewers interpret it as the coffin being opened in order to remove the corpse of old Brother Fain, whiile I assumed – based on the scene's implication of "closure" – that all that had already been done, and that the body of Damien Karras was finally, properly, being laid to rest). But yes … the exorcism scenes, though a tack-on, were handled poetically (all the visionary, symbolic material) – and with restraint (no foul language, sexual gestures, vomiting, etc.) Blatty gave MC what they wanted, and saved his dignity at the same time.

Post edited 9:47 PM – June 22, 2011 by granville1

---

<ignore>

fraroc said:

I hate how people think that Kinderman "murdered" Karras at the end. The ONLY reason why kinderman wanted to euthanize him was to make sure that Damien's soul reaches Heaven, free from anymore demonic forces and forever in the loving, nurtring arms of The Lord.

<snip>

But who would play Kinderman?

---

Golly, WHY don't people get it?? First, they think in The Exorcist, Karras committed suicide; then, in Legion, they think Kinderman murdered Karras. Shocking examples of inattention to the obvious :(

I don't know who would play Kinderman – he has to be able to balance superlogical/Sherlock Holmes with homey, schmalzy Jewishness – as Lee J. Cobb did so admirably. Maybe Dustin Hoffman – seriously, he can really act, he is, like the Kinderman character, an older person, and he could do the "brilliant but corny Jewish detective" easily.

Yeah, this is a place for people who really respect the film and related material, much differerent from many other public boards, newsgroups, forums, etc. :)