CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
- This topic has 25 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
This seems to be the source that those imdb flakes of recent discussion here have been using to trash Burke Dennings…
Nice analysis on the presenter’s part, but such insights ought to be validated only in a remake of the film (where they could could conceivably update the story for the modern day masses who seem to crave the sexual in their entertaiment — and maybe then, incidentally, they wouldn’t laugh at the subject matter(…?!); it’s the culture we find ourselves in today). In the original, I do grant that from my modern day point of view it’s easy to imagine that Burke was up to something. But I’m not sure 1970s Blatty had such an idea in mind, much less to exploit and hype as much as this guy seems to want to. I mean, the way Chris talks about Burke, I hear more sympathy for a lonely man and family friend, than a family friend who’s attracted to any female he can find.
Oh well, the more the film is discussed, the better, right? 🙂
M.I.K.E.
While I disagree about the theory that Reagan is being molested by Burke, I do think it’s an interesting point the reviewer brings to the table about her symptoms of someone who has been molested. I never really thought about it but I guess I am surprised that wasn’t mentioned in the film because it would be one of the first theories a doctor would conclude these days.
Ghetto, I agree, THESE DAYS molestation would be one of the first theories a doctor would conclude. Not back then.
I also disagree with this analysis of the film, albeit a refreshing take on the depth of The Exorcist. There is far too much going on spiritually for any of this to make any sense on the surface.
Interesting theory, none the less.
I agree with you, Captain. The online video documentary is useful in showing the striking contrast between the times when The Exorcist came out, and our times.
While our times would suspect abuse, the late ’60s and early ’70s were more “innocent” in that regard. Unfortunately such “innocence” shielded molestation and other forms of abuse. This trend was unfortunately started by Freud and Jung, who tended to detect “incest fantasy” in all too many cases in which actual abuse was probably the actual cause of symptoms.
Pertinently, Blatty’s demon is itself a child abuser and (“the bone-white crucifix”) an actual rapist. Regan is Pazuzu’s “honey piglet” and his “pearl”, whom he claims has a “succulent c–t”. With _this_ nasty, evil figure, the novel and film don’t need poor Burke Dennings to fill in as a child-abusing character.
Moreover, in reference to the difference between The Exorcist’s time and ours: I wonder if Blatty could write that crucifix-rape scene today. Disregarding the pain, blood, and sadism, the scene is a blatant example of explicit child sexual activity. Blatty’s demon speaks with “a throaty eroticism” as the crucifix is sensually stroked in and out of the twelve-year-old’s private parts.
Such a scene today even if discovered in the worst sado-masochistic schlock horror pulp porn would evoke howls from the watchdogs of public morality. It’s amazing that a book with such a scene has survived without censorship and is available in bookstores and libraries for folks of all ages to read.
But coming as it did from a public figure whose reputation in film and literature was already well-established, would provoke a firestorm of outrage today. Can you imagine the headlines and headers for talk shows… “Has Bill Blatty lost his mind?… Is he trying to ruin his own career?… No, Mr. Blatty, we will NOT allow your book in our community, and consider your lectures and guest appearances cancelled… Explicit Child Rape Adorns Blatty’s Newest Novel (read all about it on page six!)!!!”…
Or, perhaps not. After all, the full cut of Leon does have Portman bedding Reno, if only for companionship. And Dakota Fanning’s latest flick has her (the plucky little trouper) endure a molestation scene, albeit acted-out in her safely semi-explicit body vinyl.
Anyway, maybe times have changed. Or maybe not all that much.
That’s possible, but unlikely, since Dennings had no particular religious beliefs and thus no motivation to do it. Also, Chris would probably have discovered the crucifix much earlier in the story. It’s a mystery why Dennings went upstairs to Regan’s room, but it’s certain that she broke his neck “in the witchcraft manner” and pushed the body out the window.
I go with the checking up on the weird noises theory as to whyhe was in there in the first place. That, or Regan called for help… just thinking out loud.
That would make a shocking scene indeed, but it would also remove the shock from the Karras/Kinderman dialog where Dennings’ death is described verbally rather than shown. Before that dialog, we know from “Chuck’s” visit to Chris’s house that Dennings broke his neck. But we don’t know that it had been turned completely around, facing backward. I don’t know which is more shocking, actually showing the head-turning or allowing this fact to hit the audience via verbal description…
For the original film, the way it plays now is perfect, no doubt about that.
What I’m suggesting is, in some sort of sequel (and I’m only day dreaming here, not desiring) it would be pretty interesting to see the murder take place. See how it happened and what triggered it, that sort of thing.
But I don’t wish for it, because I’m sure it would be a botched production. Just a nice idea, is all.
I agree with Dennings more than likely checking up on strange noises – and he knew Regan was sick from the party so he peobably wanted to make sure she was OK and nothing was wrong.
Wouldn’t it be kind of freaky to actually see Dennings’ death in some kind of sequel/remake one day?
They are the kind of plot arcs that keep fans interested, in my opinion.
Yeah, Blatty/Friedkin established early in the story/movie that “poltergeist” noises were already present by the time Dennings went up to her room… or, as you say, Regan or the demon lured Dennings up with a call for help.
Yes, actually showing Denning’s demise would be an interesting scene. It would have the shock-advantage of showing the viewer, whereas the novel and Friedkin’s film don’t show it. It could be very creepy. After a brief, casual conversation where Sharon asks Denning to stay while she gets the prescription: Dennings now alone in the house. The noises. Maybe a demonic rumble. Maybe a “Please help me!” from the upstairs room. Dennings makes his way up those frightful stairs, flings open the door – and then…! Yeah, this could be very effective.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.