CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
- This topic has 15 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
OK this is a question which is really bothering me. Everyone is saying that the demon inside Karras at the end is Pazuzu (demon from the original exorcist).
But I don’t get it, the demon in this movie is more calm and relaxed, more mature and he speaks in a soft voice, also he doesn’t do any crazy stuff like regan did. Whereas Pazuzu in Exorcist original was crazy, loud, more demonic, head spinning, swearing, shouting.
So is karras possessed by another demon or is it Pazuzu just acting really differntly?
In the first movie, it’s a child possessed, and doing obscene things, what works with a child wont necessarily work with an adult.
The Demon is using a different approach, it doesn’t have to use the same old tricks.
I’m guessing that you are referring to LEGION, yes?
I have to confess that I did not read the novel…
***Heretic Dream ducks to avoid the barrage of tomatoes being thrown by hardcore Blatty fans, and presumably being spit rapid fire from an angry Kokumo’s mouth!***That having been said, I always thought that the main and dominant entity in possession of Damien’s body was the soul of the Zodiac Killer, James Venamun. Leader of the LEGION within the body, which includes the tortured soul of Damien Karass.
In the film it seems as if that only the spirit of the Zodiac Killer actually speaks, with the exception of one or two words actually uttered by Damian (with great effort, no doubt). One hears the roarings and rumblings of the others but not much of anything that is intelligible.
Do not forget too, that Venamun speaks of it taking 15 years to properly regenerate Damien’s brain cells…so that may be part of the reason he is a bit more subdued. I feel that it is simply much more likely to be indictive of Venamun’s personality. Acidic, yet quiet…before his volcanic, insane outbursts!
Interestingly, a legion of voices can be heard coming from Regan in the original film, while Merrin tells Damien quite firmly that there is only one personality present. This of course, is Pazuzu (Neoonmai!).
“throws tomatoes at Heretic Dream” and then confesses that he too has not read the novel “gets pelted by tomatoes aswel”.
by the way Heretic Dream it’s the Gemeni killer, not Zodiac, the zodiac was from the movie with Jake Gylenhall in it. Quite a boring film to be honest. =/
True most of the movie was about Karras possessed by the gemini killer, but at the end when father morning comes in, pazuzu the demon who placed jame’s venamuns soul in karas’ body takes over and well, acts the total opposit to who he was previously.
I guess this question will never be solved, the filmakers should have told us the reason Pazuzu was acting more quietly and calm.
If you notice in Exorcist: The Beginning Pazuzu was still acting the same as regan did, well not as distrubing but you get what i mean. Then again in Dominion, Pazuzu is nowhere near the same as Regan, he turned perfect or something didn’t he whereas the possession was meant to make you weak and ill, like regan (scars, underweight, puking, heart problems) as you could see when Karras was checking her heartbeat jus after the first part of the exorcism.
To be honest i’m really dissapointed with how they kept changing Pazuzu’s character, it’s really ruined the exorcist feeling for me. They shouldn’t had made the sequels to be honest. =(
***Smashes a large tomato into his own face for making such a silly error***
Well DUH, and double damn! Of course, I meant the Gemini Killer and not the Zodiac Killer. Sorry!
I’d be interested to hear what anyone else has to say. I’ve got some knowledge, but I’m not an Exorcist Expert.
In any case, I don’t know that I’d want every last thing explained to me by the producers…
I turn off III when nurse “Bedelia” gets subdued. That’s where it veers off course to the ending the execs wanted instead of following the book. (Yes! I read it!)
Oh, since this topic is about III, I laughed my ass off with the rest of the audience when the old lady was crawling on the ceiling. Plus, picking George C. Scott as the detective just ruined the film. He way overacted just like Rod Steiger did in The Amityville Horror. In fact, I couldn’t pick which one deserved the Worst Acting Award on Earth … perhaps both. It’s really a shame because both were brilliant actors who took the payoffs just for their names.
III went through too many name titles and too many ways of trying to market it. If WB execs left Blatty alone, it would have been a halfway decent film.
But the thing was, George C. Scott was originally intended to play Lt. Kinderman in the original Exorcist, but he was busy at the time with Patton, so they got Lee J. Cobb instead…who did a tremendous job with the role. He always cracks me up with his conversation with Fr. Karras.
Perhaps under Friedkin's direction, Scott's performance would have been better. In III, it was like watching Rod Steiger in The Amityville Horror … way overacted.
Father Bowdern
It is an interesting point that is brought up about how Pazuzu operates. And if we hold Dominion to be in canon with the history of The Exorcist, then we basically see Pazuzu saying: “I can do anything! Don't f*** with me!”
Â
He takes a crippled, beaten, and grotesquely formed boy, the very poster child of pain and suffering, and turns him into a thing of beauty (perhaps symbolizing the perfection that Lucifer was before he was cast down from Heaven.)
Â
And then he takes a beautiful little girl many years later, and turns her into a ghastly figure of horror and vileness, subjecting her to much pain and suffering.
But then we've have to admit that Pazuzu could have made the straps disappear around Regan's wrists, right?
On that note, Blatty was wise in his writing abilities. That doesn't hold true for the sequeal writers who tried to desperately grasp to shine just as brilliantly as the master. It will never happen, no matter the number of sequels.
Father Bowdern
The impression that I was always under, was that for the movie version of Blatty's “The Exorcist”, you were supposed to believe that the invading spirit was literally “The devil himself”.Most moviegoers more than likely had not read the 1971 novel which “implies” that the spirit is Pazuzu.Sadly, it was brought out in “Exorcist II:The Heretic” in a very campy fashion.As far as the other thing goes with Karras being possessed by Pazuzu in “Legion”, it feels as though the execs at Morgan Creek wanted him to be inhabited by “The Devil Himself”, though that is never really explored.As far as the two prequels went, they were CLEARLY saying that Satan himself was the protaganist.Clearly, the creators of both the sequels and the two prequels were completely missing the boat.The only sequel that I find any redemption in now, is the novel version of “Legion”.It moves a little slow, but it has it's moments without all of the schlock that it's theatrical counterpart has.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.