CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Oh, I just read some old news that Friedkin will be working on the transfers of both the 1973 and 2000 versions for the blu-ray with Owen Roizman. I’m happy to read that because Friedkin “supervised” the transfer of The French Connection to BD. He doesn’t know Jack about digital transfers if you watched that film and were as disappointed as I was.
IF (yep, capital “IF”) Friedkin truly had a hand in TVYNS, he needs stay clear on the film’s tonal values for the BD transfer and get off his high horse name, Mr. Egotistical. Interestingly, Friedkin is quick to slice and dice 3D to shreds, yet he blessed TVYNS with all the CGI gimmicks that look exactly like CGI gimmicks? Give me a break!
From the article, “On converting The Exorcist to 3D: “No. Never. Providing I’m still alive. Warner Brothers is obligated to come to me. And they do. The point is, it’s a totally different medium. I don’t like 3D. I don’t believe there is any film that I have seen and loved that would have been improved by a scintilla in 3D. To me, it’s just a gimmick.†Again, give me a break. If WB wants a 3D version, let’s see how obligated they are to you. The Exorcist remains a cash cow for WB. If they want to re-re-re-release the film on 3D in IMAX theaters that is exactly what they will do. With the advent of home theater 3D, it’s another great way to sell this classic to new and old audiences alike.
Please, Mr. Friedkin, you WERE brilliant and you don’t have to destroy your masterpieces with mediums you don’t understand. Personally, I think Regan’s vomit should remain green versus blue! Listen to Roizman. And for God’s sake, stop using CGI to paint lipstick on this Mona Lisa.
Father Bowdern
LOL back, Sof!
I was actually going to mention Sharon, Chris, and Willie to Milton, but I just couldn’t put that one on the table. Poor Regan was so hot and sexy that anyone who encountered her could not resist her charms; this is especially true when we consider the demonic transformation.
“As Willie entered Regan’s frigid bedroom with freshly laundered bed linens in her thin, frail hands, her eyes darted directly into the piercing cat-like eyes of once was Regan. Willie was mesmerized by Regan’s self-inflicted wounds oozing with bacterial infection. Turning quickly, Willie peeked out the bedroom door to ensure no one was nearby. She silently closed the door while dropping the linens. Turning quickly, Willie faced Regan and began to unsnap the top buttons of her servant uniform. Staring at Regan’s restraints, Willie whispered in a heavy German accent, “Beech, ju vill now pay me for doing ju homework.â€
Milton, would you like the remainder of that chapter? 😉
Father Bowdern
Hmmm … perhaps your mind is on another topic entirely. I could twist anything into a direction of a sexual nature if I chose to do so. For instance, Snow White alone with seven dwarfs!
:^o
Father Bowdern
Q. 1: If you watch the movement of the figure in the window, it is that of Regan who casts the shadow. The body literally glides along the path versus that of a figure who walks. Friedkin was clever enough to show us this quick scene that ultimately ties several scenes together; e.g., the bed shaking, Regan’s body being thrust back and forth on the mattress, and the levitation scene toward the end of the exorcism. While Kinderman has no clue what Regan looks like, the shadow piques his investigative mind because Chris told Kinderman earlier that Regan is “heavily sedated.†This is one of my favorite scenes because it adds another element of the supernatural.
As an aside, WB tampered with this scene on a VHS version in the early 1990’s by adding the sound of a heartbeat just after Karras asks Chris if Regan knew about his mother’s death. When Chris finally asks, “Why?,†Karras responds, “It doesn’t matter. Good night.†WB played a heartbeat sound effect when the scene goes back to Chris’ worried look.
Q. 2: The window scene is interesting and interpretation on whether it’s concrete vs. abstract is really up to the individual’s judgment. I believe we could all interpret that scene one way or another. For instance, the window opens through Godly powers and the face of Karras’ mother is the guiding and spiritual way for Karras to save Regan from the demon. Another interpretation could be that the demon instills this image of his mother into his mind to prod Karras to dive out the window to his death. In that instance, the demon has a win-win situation because both Merrin and Karras are dead.
Another side note: The difference between the original film and TVYNS is that WB added an extra bit of sound effects and the superimposition of the mother’s face onto the window. Does it change the way that scene is interpreted? I say definitively that it does. There are so many unnecessary and forced sequences in TVYNS that it corrupts the intention of the original film in many aspects.
No matter, these are just my opinions. Either version of the film is a spectacle of wonderment. I don’t think all parts of the film must make sense to everyone in the same way, and indeed can be up for interpretation. However, if you don’t take things too literal, you may see the undertones that Blatty and Friedkin offered in the best horror film of all time.
Father Bowdern
Simone,
Basing my view on the film only, Sharon Spencer is Chris MacNeil’s film assistant … the secretary for Chris … the gopher. The initial insight about who Sharon is occurs when Chris arrives home from shooting on the film Crash Course. Sharon, poised at her typewriter, tells Chris about the dinner invitation at the White House.
The scene you recall is only in the The Exorcist: The Version You’ve Never Seen. Warner Brothers added it back into the newer version to add more tension to what’s about to happen. In essence, the seen is meaningful, but due to the running time of the original film, that quick snippet of Sharon was unfortunately cut back in 1973.
Sharon is situated in the same spot when we first meet her, it only happens to be dark and creates a closed in “cave illusion” that you mention. Sharon is actually listening to a radio station conversation on an AM/FM radio; not a police radio (police scanner). She turns up the volume in an effort to drown out the sounds of what’s going on upstairs. Therefore, Sharon and Kinderman have nothing in common regarding the detective’s arrival.
As an aside, Actress Kitty Winn played Sharon Spencer. She could emote such fear in her eyes and facial expressions that producers of The Exorcist II: The Heretic wanted her in the same role as Regan’s caretaker. Thus, a part was scripted for Kitty Winn and she accepted.
I hope that helps. 🙂
Father Bowdern
This piqued my interest … look at the owner’s name: Robert O’Malley here. I know William O’Malley (Father Dyer) and Robert O’Malley don’t match on the front end, but so what? O’Malley makes the point and I think you’re on to something more than reasonable. O’Malley from the film is now 82. He has published more than 30 books, so I’m sure he had some “private cash” to either buy the home himself for retirement or give to another O’Malley family member to buy it in 2008.
Can you image a more enjoyable place to live out the rest of your life?
Father Bowdern
Well, the good thing is that you can always check YouTube for the entire U.S. version of the U.K. BBC FOG sanctioned by WB. Apparently, McCambridge wanted something more in return financially – or – WB cut her out over the initial lawsuit for a lack of credit in the 1973 release of The Exorcist. Who knows?
Father Bowdern
More than likely. The house filmed in The Exorcist is a true tourist trap … so much so that the owners put up that ugly black fence that surrounds it. A demon and then a black fence … there goes the neighborhood.
Father Bowdern 🙂
Sof,
You amaze me with your superior “mental index” of this book. If we ever get a mini-series, I’m voting for you as “Script Supervisor.”
Father Bowdern
AllBGirl,
In what manner did you witness this possession? Was this during a sermon? What do you believe brought about the presence of a demonic possession? Very intriguing.
Father Bowdern
AllBGirl,
In what manner did you witness this possession? Was this during a sermon? What do you believe brought about the presence of a demonic possession? Very intriguing.
Father Bowdern
AllBahianGirl said:
Father Bowdern Happy Easter to you. I have a question for you off the record. Is it possible that demons can cause physical illness in the body?
Happy Belated Easter to you! 🙂
My answer to your question is akin to the response you would hear Father Karras say in the film about psychological disorders versus possession and exorcisms. For instance, for some individuals it is easier, and perhaps more plausible, to blame someone or something for an physiological and/or psychological disorder (some that even led individuals to murder).
Going back, look at Ronald DeFeo of The Amityville Horror scheme. Both DeFeo and then the Lutz’s scammed individuals for one thing … money. DeFeo killed all six of his immediate family members for the insurance money. He claimed everything from a mob hit to demonic voices in his head which led to his family’s demise. The Lutz’s, on the other hand, were just two ordinary individuals that couldn’t afford the life they just bought on credit. With the knowledge of the DeFeo murders, the two dreamed up the paranormal activities of the house in 1975 … only two years after the release of The Exorcist.
And, finally, the case of Anneliese Michel. Truly, a very sad case of religion overriding medical attention. Anneliese did not die from demons; she died at the hands of ignorance of the individuals around her. Again, there is much speculation that Anneliese had seen the film The Exorcist and carried out a full imitation until the day she died of starvation and exhaustion. If you haven’t heard of this case, here is a video link to it. The Possession of Emily Rose is loosely based on this case. However, that film failed to make the same impact as The Exorcist.
All of these references are sad as they blame religion for these nefarious acts and actions. If we erased any religion from the human psyche in which possession or a guiding force of evil occurs, the next best bet is to blame the parents for their upbringing. In other words, our personalities and actions are a composite of the overall experiences and events that surround us during the formidable years. If you’re not convinced, look at Dr. Ted Kaczynski, Geoffrey Dahmer, and Ted Bundy.
Peace,
Father Bowdern
Oh, mercy to publishing it Cap (Justin deserves that!). However, I’m afraid this will go global. [Actually, it does deserve to go global just for the laughs it provides].
Thank for Friedkin’s seeing something in his “mind’s eye” and realizing he had a disaster on his hands … The Exorcist could have easily become another Roller Boogie! 🙂
Father Bowdern
Happy Easter (Early!) Sof and Everyone,
I think the book and novel get better each time you put the clues together. Again, Blatty is a brilliant writer; Friedkin is a brilliant director. Often, however, I wonder how the film version of The Exorcist would look if it wasn’t for Friedkin’s guidance. In essence, we really have two versions of the story. The banter between Blatty and Friedkin in the FOG displays that truth nicely.
AllBGirl, when I was leaving the film back in the 1970s, I had many questions about how things may have connected. I went to this film several times and enjoyed its release on both VHS and the LP-sized LaserDisc. In your reference to how Regan could find the time to do the nefarious deeds at Dalgren Chapel? I point to one of the many demons (recalling the holy water scene when Karras returns to “Regan†for any sign of possession and the voices that cry out in a deadly crescendo) or Pazuzu. One or all inhabited Regan’s body periodically in the beginning.
Father Bowdern
