CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes…. plus, the demon is tormenting Karras by using the French phrase to throw him off track and show utter disrespect to his purposes. It's one of the demons first bombardments launched against Karras. There is also the speaking in Latin and the demon's knowledge that Karras' mother has died, and the demon's knowledge of Karras' encounter with that “old altar boy”. The demon draws first blood and continues to increase the tension, verbally and physically.
Yes … also, the demon is tormenting Karras by replying in phrases that have no context to the questions he is asking, and are flippant to his purposes. The demon has planted the seeds of belief and doubt in Karras' mind: Regan has unusual verbal powers, and she's using them to keep him off the track. She may or not be supernaturally influenced, but she is aware that her language usage can harrass Karras. Then she displays knowledge of Karras' mother's death, as well as knowledge of his encounter with the “old altar boy”. “La plume de ma tante” is one of the first bombardments the demon launches against Karras.
Yes, plus she's tormenting Karras by citing a nonsense phrase, i.e., a phrase completely out of context to the questions Karras has been asking her and completely flippant toward Karras' purposes. The demon is letting Karras know it knows foreign languages (French, Latin), and can use them to evade and mock.
Yeah, Dyer/O'Malley was great. In the novel he's a much shorter man with spectacles – sort of “elfish” – but O'Malley played him perfectly even without the physical attributes. He'd never had a screen role before, and iirc, his only acting experience was in college and in teaching high school dramatics. Too bad Friedkin thought he had to punch the priest in the face to get a “just-so” performance out of him at the bottom of the Hitchcock Steps. Whatever – his grief was fully believable, just as it was in the top-of-the-stairs scene you mention.
Even the other Jesuit, who played “Tom” in the tavern, to whom Karras tells his troubles and of whom Karras asks for a reassignment, played it exactly “straight”. I would have guessed he, too, was not an actor, but a priest.
Even the NON-clergy who played clergy were the real deal, e.g., the shocked little deacon bringing flowers to the chapel only to discover the desecrated chapel, the guy who played the bishop in two scenes (the second scene featuring “Tom” again).
Great stuff 🙂
The novel first turned me on to it, then I heard it was going to be filmed, and with so many others I thought, How the hell are they gonna shoot this, especially the crucifix scene?
I was grabbed from the first frames. The sun over Iraq, the dig, Von Sydow's uncanny performance as he meets with premonitions, the archetypal, mythic setting.
Then the cold, documentary feel as the screen shows the Georgetown bridge. The “squirrels in the attic”, the homelife of a famous movie star, visiting her on the set, Karras laughing at Denning's obscene language. By that early time in the film, i was hooked and couldn't take my eyes and ears off its grand narrative and fascinating characters. Friedkin/Blatty “had” me. The effect was somewhat like the Dawn of Man sequences in 2001 and the very first segment of The Greatest Story Ever Told … being slowly but surely pulled into the story by an artistic use of understatement and judicious use of silence(s) … almost like hypnotic induction. Being made to strain a bit to be able to catch everything.
The absolutely realistic dialogue between Chris and Dr. Klein, especially in the office visit where Klein describes Regan's obscene vocabulary. The two actors played perfectly off each other, and the scene itself contributed its part to the rising sense of dread.
Dick Smith's makeup.
Karras/Miller, as you mentioned.
One of the very few films where priests are portrayed authentically, as real people who smoke cigarettes, feel guilty and “lost” in that particular modern way (Karras counseling the young priest, “There isn't a day I don't feel like a fraud. I've talked to them all, doctors, lawyers …”). The Exorcist's clergy are the real deal. No creepy, poached-eyed freaks like the priest in the first Omen movie, not overly pious, but intelligent, witty, worthy, willing to lend a hand. Just like the priests I knew from my Catholic upbringing.
I could go on and on, but these are my basic impressions.
Thank you … you can tell I'm an Exorcist addict. Of course, I could quit tomorrow if I wanted.
No, that's a lie.
u r welcome. I do hope you enjoy the book and don't allow my negatives to interfere with that enjoyment 🙂
I enjoyed the “Blattian” elements like …
ÂÂ
SPOILERS
ÂÂ
… his borrowed but effective use of “The Angel’ theory which dovetails nicely with Merrin’s own philosophy in the first novel; his artful going for the jugular with mental illness and supernatural horror; and of course, returning the reader to Georgetown.
ÂÂ
However, I could, and cannot not stand most of Kinderman’s “religio-philosophical” ruminations. They’re mostly nothing but a poorly-organized attack on evolution combined with an equally soft-headed defense of Intelligent Design. I had always thought more highly of Kinderman than to view him as an uncritical fundamentalist, who completely misunderstands the actual claims of evolutionary science. For me, that’s Legion’s major failing, which is too bad, because there is just too damn much of it; it consumes pages of the story and ultimately destroys its capacity to be a real “page-turner”.
All this, only to be, sadly, capped by an extremely weak “climax” where nothing happens except that, having become aware that his hated father has just dropped dead, the Gemini simply dies, slipping away quite gently without any real, anguishing struggle with Kinderman (or with any potential exorcists). This is strange, if only because of the fact that the Gemini is not acting independently, but has been inserted into Karras’ body, and sustained in that condition, by The Exorcist’s original – and savagely vengeful – demon. What?? The demon loses control of the Gemini because the Gemini just up and decides to kick the bucket ?? This makes the demon seem weak in a way it never was in the first novel and film. In this – the Gemini’s demise – the film Exorcist III: Legion contains a definitive (if somewhat over-the-top) climax, where the real demon finally displaces “my son the Gemini”, re-appearing as a real, powerful agent … and directly combats the exorcist Fr. Morning, Kinderman, and the trapped remnants of Damien Karras’ personality. Relatively speaking, the novel’'s climax, unfortunately, is merely pallid anti-climax …
… and … there is a very nasty, unresolved insinuation about the love of Dr Amfortas’ life, to the effect that she had been cheating on the psychiatrist with his vicious nemesis Dr Temple; and a much worse insinuation that Amfortas had a hand in deliberately assisting the Gemini in the rash of Georgetown serial killings. The entire book leaves the impression of having been written in a hurry, which may explain some of its omissions and other glaring flaws.
Legion is one of my favorite reads, not least because of its middle portion involving Dr Amfortas, Fr Dyer, and a very spooky entry into paranormal EVP tape recordings. It’s just that its flaws remove it from the radiant arena in which The Exorcist is forever, deservedy, ensconced.
Yes, after hearing it in the film, I went out and bought Tubular Bells in vinyl and became a Mike Oldfield fan shortly thereafter 🙂
Nicely done. For some reason, the unframed has more punch than the framed, but that's just my impression.
I didn't know it but if I had to guess, I'd bet it is a rare promo item. There were some Ex III: Legion hats and shirts floating around back around when the film was produced. It would be a kick to have some of them, too…
Regan88 said:
I finally got him.
ÂÂ
Congrats, it's a beautiful artifact 🙂
