CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
- This topic has 64 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello GRANVILLE1. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. It's nice to discuss with someone who is very passionate about “THE EXORCIST” franchise just like me. Before continuing our discusion, I just want to specefy that my intentions are not to enter a “pissing contest”, but rather to share diferent views and pass the time, even thought I might sound autochratic at times. Sorry. It's just the way I write. I don't want to have problems since I'm new here. Thanks.
granville1 said:
“As good a time as any to laugh and leave. The machine was ridiculous, as was the simultaneous “Merrin Agonistes” scene where the ultra-fake Blair stand-in crushes Merrin's heart while the Synchronizer does its thing. Blatty had the good sense to leave before he split a gut.”
 That scene was brilliant, original, ingenious and ahead of its time. It was the perfect and only solution to show the audience, in a new and innovative way, what really happened in that room. From Boorman's point of view of course.
About the ultra-fake Blair…Linda clrearly told Boorman that she would reprise her role only under the condition that she will not play as the “evil” Blair. She did not want to wore devil make-up again. Boorman had no choice but to replace her with another actress.
Â
granville1 said:
“No. The full 360 degree head spin is not in the novel or the original screenplay.”
That is not what I said GRANVILLE1, be fair. I said the 360 degree head-spin, WHICH IS IN THE MOVIE, is false. And its still a lie. Yes it was Friedkin idea, not Blatty. I’ll give you that.
Like I told you before GRANVILLE1, for optimum answers and clear debate, PLEASE LEAVE THE NOVEL OUT. We are discussing the movie. I don’t care about the novel or the original screenplay. I care about the FINISHED product, which is the cut we all saw in the movie. Thank you.
granville1 said:
“The half-head spin, however, is humanly possible – it's been demonstrated on You Tube several times.”
 The half-spin head is not on debate here. I am talking about the 360 degree scene. Let’s stay within boundaries please. And yes the half-spin head is humanly possible. I never said the contrary.
Â
granville1 said:
“No. Blatty is a big believer in the parnormal and has reported such events in his own life, such as a telephone receiver that floated up over the phone by itself while he was sitting next to it.”
 GRANVILLE1, in life there is reality and fiction.
Blatty might SAY that he is a believer of all these things, BUT IT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS TRUE OR REAL. He might fool the old generation of movie fanatics, but he can’t fool the new generation which is much smarter.
Tue. I also heard about that little telephone incident. See the thing is GRANVILLE1, some people lie for a living in order to make lucrative gains.
Have you ever studied physics GRANVILLE1? Here’s the thing…
There are two worlds in this universe…
1- The physical world (Matter), thats where we live in.
2- The metaphysical world (Anti-Matter), thats where the angels and demons exist.
One universal law separates both worlds. Matter particles and anti-matter particles cannot come in contact with each other.
Why? Because both would trigger a massive explosion and will annihilate each other. So if a demon or spirit intentionally lifted that phone receiver, it would have destroyed itself and anything or anyone near by.
Go ahead, do your home work and search in the net. So the little phone incident is a no-no. Tell that to another.
Â
granville1 said:
“…about what Father Walter Halloran says “. It's a question of whom you want to believe. At least one other priest, plus “Robbie's” minister, and several eyewitnesses vouched for paranormal events in the original case.
It would not be the first time that a priest or eyewitnesses lied about something.
Ever heard about the “AMITYVILLE HORROR†incident? In 1977, the priest involved in the case also swore that he heard a voice say “get outâ€. The author of the book, Jay Anson also swore that all the events in his book were absolutely true. The Lutz family also swore that all the events were true.
Guess what? Now everyone in the world know that it was a big fat lie to sell the book and make money. They were trying to capitalize on the success of “THE EXORCIST” which was also based on true facts.
William Weber confessed: “The book is a hoax. We created this horror story over many bottles of wine.” This refers to a meeting that Weber is said to have had with George and Kathy Lutz, during which they discussed what would later become the outline of Anson's book.
Judge Weinstein concluded: “Based on what I have heard, it appears to me that to a large extent the book is a work of fiction, relying in a large part upon the suggestions of Mr. Weber.”
Oops! Busted! Like I said, there is fiction and there is reality.
granville1 said:
“Blatty was not “lying” when he made some of these events part of the MacNeil case. Rather, Blatty conflated events from the original case with the strongest kinds of similar events from exorcistic documentation.”
No my dear GRANVILLE1, Blatty in an interview back in 1983, had asserted on live t.v. that the “levitation” scene is true. He did not conflated that. He assured it. In real exorcism that never occurs. Sorry. You can find the interview on youtube.
About real excorsism, that is not how it goes. Have you ever seen in real life how a possessed person behaves? I come from a country where excorsism is like going to work everyday. A possessed kid behaves like a kid on “ectasyâ€. Nothing more. He becomes very hyper and uncontrollable. Screaming all the time and almost resembles a epileptic seizure. Adults are more aggressive thats all. Most of the time they act like an animal (bird, wolf). But there is no levitation, no vomiting and no poltergeist phenomenon. Nothing super fancy.
Â
granville1 said:
“This conflation is artisitic license, not “lying”, because Blatty took the incidents, and his paranormal research, at face value.”
So what only Blatty has the right to conflate? Leave Boorman alone. He's a top notch movie Director. Very meticulous.
Â
granville1 said:
“Except the question itself does not need to be asked.”
Yes the question IN THE MOVIE NEEDS TO BE ASKED. Jason Miller confirmed in an interview that the movie was shot in an ambiguous style on purpose. And that the idea of leaving questions unanswered was also on purpose. He said Friedkin wanted the movie to have an “ambiguous†tone.
granville1 said:
“Merrin dropped dead of a heart attack. There is no “burning question” about “what transpired” between the demon and the priest.”
First of all, IN THE MOVIE, the hands of Regan were tied before Merrin went to the bathroom. Duh!
When Karras came in her hands were UNTIED! What happened there? I thought you were more observant GRANVILLE1. Also in a scene where Lieutenant Kinderman is parked outside, he sees Regan WALKING in the room through the window when she was left ATTACHED! Spooky isn’t it?
So the question is, AGAIN IN THE MOVIE NOT IN THE NOVEL, did Father Merrin die of a heart attack or did Regan kill him? Again this is one of the many questions planted in the movie.
Boorman chose the latter, Regan killed Father Merrin.granville1 said:
“Nor was there any mystery or question as to why Regan was possessed to begin with. She was not part of a new generation of holy people Satan was attacking via possession. Rather – and quite simply – Regan was selected for possession by the demon for the explicit reason…”
Now where did you come up with that conclusion GRANVILLE1?
When I first saw the “EXORCISTâ€, I was 6 years old. Scared the living shit out of me. Thanks a lot dad.
After that, just like Blatty, I developed a tremendous passion about exorsism. Just like Blatty, I did an extensive research throughout many years. Learning everything there is to know about possession.
1- Do you know how a person gets possessed in the first place?
2- Do you know the 3 basic rules for being possessed?
3- Do you know what laws a demon must respect before entering a living person?
4- Do you know what kind of persons a demon can possess?
5- Do you know what kind of persons he cannot possess, and why he cannot possess?
6- Can a demon possess someone just for fun or out spite or out of vengeance?
If you can answer all these questions GRANVILLE1 than you are an expert and I will shut my mouth and call you “The Lord Of The Flies”.Â
granville1 said:
“Hardly. Probably most of the people in that particular theater did not even know that Blatty was there. Even if they did, you are taliking about a single incident in a single theater…”
Do you know what it takes to start a fire GRANVILLE1? Just a little spark. That little single incident was enough to start a very big fire.
And yes, everyone knew that Blatty was there. Thats why its on WIKIPEDIA. It was the grand premiere. Boorman was also present.
granville1 said:
“The filmed bombed under its own weight (EXCORCIST 2).”
The movie mainly bombed because John Boorman was a high class visionary and a very open minded director. The audience however, was very narrow minded and old fashioned at the time. Science Fiction movies were not popular at all. The studios did not want them at all. Neither did the public. Thats where John Boorman played with fire and got burned. The “synchronizer” gadget was too much for the crowd. Also the audience at the time prefered a slow paced movie with a lot of tension and easy to follow. Again, here Boorman went over the edge too fast as he chose a psychadelic/frenetic style aproach which confused everyone, and ultimately played against him.
Oh yeah, Blatty didn't help the cause either…
Â
granville1 said:
“Thus, the story is complete in itself. It needs no embellishment or creation of false mysteries.”
Wrong. “EXORCIST†is not perfect. The story is not complete in the movie. It is very, very, very good. But it needs just a little embellishment. I will be very strict with “THE REMAKEâ€, as I have my own personal script and screenplay already done for a while now. Correcting all the invisible mistakes and answering EVERY QUESTION POSSIBLE. I also have scripts and screenplays for “remakes†of “EXORCIST 2â€, “EXORCIST 3â€, “EXORCIST: PREQUEL†and “EXORCIST 5â€. I do this as a hobby.
I also have storys for “DEMONS 3” and “DEMONS 4” for Dario Argento. Storys for “FLATLINERS 2” and much more…Â
Yes I am a very big movie fan.
Â
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.