CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
- This topic has 31 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m still not convinced that the original was ever filmed with the blood pouring from Regan’s mouth. And, yes, CGI has been in film for years, but that’s not the point here. I believe we’re discussing the fact that the scene was indeed made with CGI blood for TVYNS. It does look realistic, but so do the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park! 😉
I do believe you have a great point on the spider-walk in the intro as a premonition, but wouldn’t that kind of be overplay on dream sequences in The Exorcist? If Chris’ dream sequence includes the spider-walk scene, I think audiences would be lost just as many viewers were lost when the dialogue between Regan and Chris took place after she emptied her bladder on the floor at the party.
Regan: “Mother, what’s wrong with me?”
Chris: “It’s just like the doctor said, it’s nerves and that’s all. Okay? You just take your pills and you’ll be fine, really. Okay?”There’s nothing in the original that helped audiences know that Regan was even remotely ill. The only clue to that is the scene I mention above. But, audiences kept wondering what’s wrong with her and then the violent bed-shaking episode takes place.
The spider-walk doesn’t work, but it’s cool as shit to see it because it was in the book. I have a Regan Spider-Walk right in front of me on my desk in my office as I write this (sans the CGI blood), so I don’t hate the scene. It’s just that the scene doesn’t work either way it … with blood/without blood. However, that scene was a great way to make $$$ for WB when they released TVYNS. 🙂
drexul, I love that word, “snarky!” Consider that I’m going to steal it from you and use it from now on! 🙂
With that one sentence, there was no intention on my part to be “snarky. That reference to the word “period” in that sentence is just that. Friedkin didn’t go on any further (which surprises me). That particular sentence is intended to be read as a part of the whole paragraph where I ended it with a wink. ( 😉 )
Incidentally, although your posting led me to finding this information, it really is meant to be shared with everyone … don’t take it so personally. “Blogging,” like email, can be misinterpreted as “snarky” sometimes when there is no intention of that at all. >>>>>> 🙂
Peace Out!
Are you trying to say that the whole blood coming out of mouth was cgi to begin with? Would the actress then have had to just have had her mouth open with nothing coming out for them to add in later? Perhaps so. Remember that they drew in Linda’s vomit.
drexul, to some degree, yes. What I’m saying is that Linda R. Hager’s mouth was created opened through CGI with the blood pouring out. Two reasons: 1. Blatty said there was never an alternate filmed (i.e., no bloody one; no snake-like one); 2. CGI artists have been able to create the entire mouths of animals and humans for years now on moving faces. Look at Eddie Murphy’s version of Dr. Doolittle.
As far as the painstakingly frame-by-frame painting of the vomit coming from Regan’s mouth, Friedkin knew after he saw the dailies of Dick Smith’s device on Eileen Dietz that he didn’t like it. Therefore, he filmed that singular scene of Blair with her mouth open simulating the vomiting action then. (In The FoG, Smith said he never knew that his device was not used for the entire scene until the premiere). We know we see Eileen Dietz in the apparatus for that one split second at the end. This is perhaps because that quick spot worked. However, if you freeze-frame that scene, it doesn’t look a thing like Linda Blair, so you know the entire scene was probably a dud and Friedkin acted on it then. In post-production, Friedkin said the vomit was painted in coming from Blair’s face because it just did not work on the Dietz version.
Which leads us back to the Linda R. Hager scene on two levels. In 1973, you really needed to have the actor with the mouth open to add that special effect of vomiting (the Blair scene). Today, CGI can fake most anything … including drawing in the whole mouth with blood pouring out (the Hager scene sans an open mouth).
Finally, I can only go by the FAQ from the snarky William Friedkin. Plus, other facts from books and online references don’t expose another filming with blood. No other scene existed. So I am convinced that CGI was employed that opened Hager’s mouth with blood pouring out. I have been studying this film for over 25 years on some level because it made me think hard about religion and Catholicism. I am both religious and a Catholic, but my work is in science. So, I try to have a balanced approached on my views and seek the reality versus the fantasy. Yet, The Exorcist is exactly that … a fantasy escape written by this society’s Edgar Allen Poe.
Oh, and the snake-tongue flicking out of Regan’s mouth was done after she (Hager) flipped around. IOW, after Linda R. Hager finished her scene. Someone on here has already mentioned that. If you watch the snake tongue flicking out of Blair’s mouth it is hardly plausible and tremendously laughable. And the clincher is (I’m repeating myself), where would the blood from Regan’s mouth have gone after she flipped around and started doing the snake tongue flicking? It doesn’t make sense to have Blair without the blood on her face and doing this snake tongue flicking thing. Continuity would have been shot down the tubes.
Watch the scene the way it was shot and edited in its entirety (the only one that exists). The original was intermixed with the side view and the front view. It’s here. By comparison, watch the scene that has been severely cut. That scene features only two shots: one in which Hager climbs backward all the way down with only the last few seconds devoted to the “bloody-mouth spewing.” That scene is here.
drexul, I too enjoy our quid pro quid blogs. It’s fun to be able to share information on here, ya big ole “snarky” friend of mine! 🙂
hey there…
no worries fatherbowdern…I love your posts on here…Im amazed at the information you bring here. And I love the word snarky too….its so rare that one gets to use it.Hi Folks,
I’m happy to say I received my figurine today! I ordered it through the link below and it arrived within one week (they sent it FedEx which was a great surprise)!
I’m not sure if I’m the first one to get this figurine as a fellow Exorcist Fansite member (I haven’t read any reviews yet), so I’ll be the first to give you a quickie review:
1. Packaging is expertly executed both from the figurine aspect and the shipping aspect.
2. The sculpture and painting of the figurine is par to none. It is extremely detailed which gives this figurine the “wow factor.” I know we’ve all seen mock-up figurines that are painted very intricately and then order one only to receive a very low-grade job. This is not the case here … I am more than pleased and you will be, too.
3. Cost is always a major factor in well-done figurines and this one is a shocker at only $17.00 margin. More than well worth it’s cost for a poly-resin figurine that depicts the scene with the greatest of accuracy.
It’s worth getting this in the mail by ordering through this great site! The purchases we make here benefit CH.com, so I’m copying the link from the homepage to order yours:
I can’t wait for the second one!
Order Yours Here!
Bowdern, now you’ve peek my curiosity. I’ve examined both of those clicks in detail off-line in slow motion. Although I cannot make any judgement, especially given the poor resolution of the clips, clearly a view of the girl coming down stairs existed in the original shot and I believe there was more than enough to work with to create the “open mouth” graphically. I cannot say anything for certain, I don’t know whether they’d had done it via 3D modelling or composite. In either event unless someone can prove otherwise I’m going to lean toward the fatha’s opinion on this one. Thanks
“no snake-like one”
That was filmed though, with the tongue, right? Or are you referring to something else people were saying were alternates?
It dawned on me as well that the entire mouth may have been put on by CGI. Such a shame that Linda Hager didn’t do more films, and that you can’t find her on Google like Eileen. I’d e-mail and ask her.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.