CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
- This topic has 13 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have to agree with your comment about Japanese films. When I saw Ring I was crapping myself! Well, I was watching it on my own in the dark! Which is, of course, the best way to watch horror! But it was just so damn creepy. The effects were not that good and the make up could have been better but the overall simplicity of the film created a hugely dark and scary atmosphere. I find that the pyschological horror creates the best scare for me nowadays. Even The Sixth Sense was excellent for that and no I didnt get it!! I wont say what in case anyone here hasnt seen it! As much as I love slashers, blood and guts dont really scare anymore, just shock. When it gets into your head and makes you doubt your own sanity, then you are good and freaked.
I must agree, Japanese Horror is all that at the moment.
But you wanna talk about “pyschological” here’s one… Clarice Starling conversing with Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Their first session was fantastic. The over-the-shoulder-point-of-view and looking-in-the-camera was incredible.You’ve completely hit the nail on the head fellini.
It is the psychological effects that THE EXORCIST, OMEN & SILENCE OF THE LAMBS has on the viewer that makes them stand out from the crowd/memorable.
In terms of SILENCE OF THE LAMBS less is more. It SUGGESTS rather than SHOWS. V. powerful just like the affect JAWS had on people. I think that’s what Hollywood fails to realise these days – (yes F/X are nice) but CGI over kill a good film does not make!
HANNIBAL (the film) clearly lacked the less is more tag. It was just gorey rather than scary/psychologically powerful.
Though back to THE EXORCIST A TRULY great film in my opinion because of its psychological power through use of sound f/x and the questions that the screenplay raises. The subject matter for me is also extremely powerful if you where brought up with religion as a child.
I think thats why the film works so well because it dares to confront your belief in good & evil (well duh!) but I find it even more powerful because it taps into my thoughts regarding religion. I went to 2 Church of England schools so have the bible fully ingrained!
I may be in a minority around here, but I despised the original Omen. First, it wasn’t scary – it was peopled with junk horror cliches from the get-go. Reliance on gore – a cross impales a priest, David Warner gets decapitated, a big scary (not) dog, unbiblical nonsense about daggers of Meggido. The second was even worse with its stupid scarey (not) ravens and a Leo McKern too embarrassed even to have his name listed in the credits. Not only does it not measure up to The Exorcist – it’s not even in the same ballpark. Fo me, it failed in two of the most crucial pillars of true horror – suspense, and…ummm… horror.
Hey granville1, you are not in the minority. I like the film, don’t get me wrong but it seems to me that The Omen has that “Hollywood Chock Full O’ Stars Summer/Holiday Weekend Blockbuster” written all over it.
You may laugh but Mr. Peck, Ms. Remick, Mr. Warner were probably still bankable when this came out.Thanks for your comments, St Michael. I think you’re correct – Warner, Peck and Remick were still bankable and very respected at the time of release. Which means their accepting the contract wasn’t some last-ditch effort to revive their careers. Yes, the “weekend blockbuster” sets the tone for The Omen, whereas The Exorcist was in a totally different league. The only hugely-known actors in it – Lee J. Cobb, Max Von Sydow, and Jack McGowern – though respected and bankable – were not the “stars”. Instead, Friedkin got grand performances from his main actors who were not generally recognized as “movie stars”, and this gave the Exorcist another unique feature.
You’re right. For me, I have no sense of dread whatsoever when I see a “star” cast in the lead of any flick. I just know he/she’s going to save the day so the series can continue.
But with The Exorcist and with the above mentioned male cast, I still feel (even though I’ve seen this film umpthteen times) like there’s no relief in sight.St. Michael, again, thanks for your perceptive remarks – I think you’ve identified a dormant factor, namely, that an all-star cast drains a film of true horror (unless the stars are already known for horror work such as Chris Lee, Andrew Keir and many more). But… Gregory Peck??? There are some exceptions, like Kidman in The Others, Willis in The Sixth Sense, Gibson in Signs, but they seem few and far between… Of course, many stars wanted the Karras role – I’ve heard that Jon Voight, Marlon Brando and others wanted the part – but Friedkin made the sharp decision to put Miller in the part… Again,thanks for your intelligent commentary.
Dude, I can’t imagine anybody other than Jason Miller in the role of Father Damien Karris.
Also, I agree completely with you:
“There are some exceptions, like Kidman in The Others, Willis in The Sixth Sense, Gibson in Signs”Yeah, Miller vividly expressed Karras’ feelings of guilt and his agony of soul, and Friedkin photographed him in a “craggy” manner to give him Karras’ “sad, chipped” face.
I do wish Miller had been a taller person, as in the novel. It took me a few viewings of The Exorcist to realize the almost comical difference in height between Miller and Von Sydow. Seems Friedkin “shot around” this, as when Merrin arrives at the MacNeil house. There’s a brief handshake between Miller and Von Sydow but immediately after, Von Sydow sits down and asks Miller to bring vestments for the exorcism – sitting down immediately makes Miller “taller” than Von Sydow. When they ascend the stairs together, the height difference is hardly noticeable. During the exorcism, they are usually separated by several feet, doing different things (Von Sydow is attending directly to Blair while Miller remains at the foot of the bed). There are only a few breif shots in which the height difference is glaring.
None of this is a big deal, and I think Miller was the best choice for the role. It’s just that sometimes I notice the height difference and it amuses me…
to me the only other horror film in the same league as the exorcist is the original version of the omen, not the new overblown hollywood remake. its a sad trend thats seems to be going around at the moment, the only country that seems to get it right in this age is the japanese, they are making the best horror films at the moment, even hollywood remade these in sub-standard version’s! my point is though the thing that we fear the most is the pyschological effect’s that make us fear tha we are losing are mind, and in the case of the exorcist and the omen, these film’s tap into these fears. it is often the case that we fear the things that we don’t fully understand and when it comes to possesion and dealing with the devil, who can honestley say that it would,nt scare us? both these are still the best films to represent what we all fear the most!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.