CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You’ve probably seen it, but The Seventh Sign with Demi Moore has an interesting portrayal of the avenging returning Christ – played by Jurgen Prochnow… billed as a supernatural thriller, it’s really a somewhat understated Jesus-themed movie.
Thanks for the kind words, pazrags, but I hadn’t thought of this question before… but my .02 cents:
Performing the exorcism in a church would probably have required the bishop’s permission and I doubt there was time to procure that. The film gives the impression that Morning rushed over to the psycho ward cell as soon as he could, with or without a bishop’s permision.
Also, a church, as a public place, would have had to been locked up, which would have brought attention to the exorcism – something to be avoided at all costs.
Another factor is the time frame – if the exorcism turned out to last days or months, the impracticality of a church exorcism would become even more exacerbated.
Re: what might happen in the church: if we extrapolate from what happened in Patient X’s cell in the psycho ward, the least we could expect in the church exorcism is a series of visionary encounters with some violent telekinesis.
In the psycho ward exorcism there were no real snakes, no real lightning, no real cracks opening up in the floor, etc – those were subjective visions used by the demon to induce terror in Morning and Kinderman.
There was a heat blast that seared Morning’s robes and his copy of the Roman Ritual, and there was a telekinetic force that nailed both Morning and Kinderman to the ceiling/wall (plus the force that ripped open Morning’s flesh).
(There is also Miss Clelia’s ceiling walk, but that does not count as part of the exorcistic scene – note also, interestingly, that the Gemini, for all his powers, remains chained to his cot througout the exorcism. There is also the bleeding crucifix and the gust of “Pazuzu wind” in Morning’s room – but again, this was not involved in the exorcistic scene.)
Put simply, there is in the film very little external paranormal violence, at least relative to the luridness of the visionary material. I don’t see why a church exorcism should be expected to necessarily exhibit anything very different. The special concern in a church exorcism, as mentioned, would be over the victim’s privacy and keeping the procedure from public scrutiny.
Not to mention that by confining the exorcism to another “icy little room in Washington, D.C.”, Blatty continued the original Exorcist scenario of showing a huge evil confined to a small space.
Good pun-catches! I don’t recall what he wrote when Temple was knocking… Guess I’ll need to re-read it again…
Of course, Legion was a tack-on. In the Legion novel, Karras only appears as his re-animated body. Karras is not present as a person. In fact the Gemnini himself says that Karras has gone on to his reward.
It is only in the Legion _film_ that Karras himself re-appears as a victim of (re-)possession, having been captured by demons in an act of demonic revenge.
Blatty’s book and Friedkin’s novel are explicit that Karras was redeemed and had a renewal of faith. The novel says his eyes had a glint of peace and triumph. Blatty is on record that the demon did not win.
The notion of Karras as having been re-captured by a demon or demons is solely the conceit of the Legion _film_. Blatty’s Legion novel wisely preserves Karras’s salvation.
Therefore, I believe it would be a mistake to consider tampering with the SFX (the yellow demonic eyes) at the end of The Exorcist to indicate that – after offering himself for possession, being possessed, and then throwing off the demon’s power – Karras had been possessed again.
That would only serve to invalidate his “hand-grasping confession” to Dyer, to confuse the question of his salvation, and to vitiate Blatty’s entire intention.
Well, Blizzi, thank you.
I really do think that, in the original story and film, a plot element of Karras’ re-possession by Gemini/Pazuzu, would certainly weaken the case for the redemption of “our beloved Damien Karras”.
Of course, Blatty consented to weaken the case when he agreed that Karras would personally re-appear as in the clutches of Gemini-Pazuzu. Guess we can blame Morgan Creek for that, at least in part.
Actually, re: a second application of the demonic yellow eyes to indicate that Karras, after successfully exorcising Regan, was re-possessed:
It strikes me that KARRAS WAS NOT ACTUALLY RE-POSESSED AT ALL!
He really exorcised Regan. He really “took the demon out the window” with him. He really saw a vision of God’s glory. Then, just before going on to his reward, he was abducted by Gemini-Pazuzu.
However, abduction does not equal possession. Karras was in the power of the demons, but his mind was clear (“Save your servant”) and his soul, though tormented was his own – and still good.
Granted, having this evil befall him after his heroic actions in saving Regan is a really nasty brutalization of a truly likeable and saintly character.
But it’s not as bad as actual possession. Karras, in the Legion to be demonically tortured, certainly, but as himself, unmarred by re-possession.
Damien Karras, we may comfort ourselves, was not re-possessed. He was demonically kidnapped, with soul and mind inviolate and intact!
Thanks, you guys. I agree with Captain that MC wanted exorcistic effects, i.e., Catholic sacramentals. I also think that Blatty was hinting at Karras’s identification with the divine Victim (the crucified Christ), as well as human victims (the “crucified” human race). Recall his inability to resist the call of others, from the alcoholic (“couldja help an old altar boy”) to whom he gives his last pocket money (unlike the cinematic Karras, who walks away), to the troubled seminarian, to Chris MacNeil, etc.
The Christian message is to take up your cross and follow Jesus, and frequently in the Roman Empire this meant literally taking up a literal cross (or being executed in some other way). Hence Karras on the cross is symbolic both of the crucified Christ, of Christian service in “taking up your cross daily”, and of compassion toward suffering, “crucified” people in general. Certainly he is being obviously identified with the black boy who had been crucified on rowing oars, and with the headless Christ statue – complete with ingot in its eyes – that appears on the cross just prior to the actual crucified Karras’s appearance.
Maybe I’m reading too much into it, this is just my .02 cents.
Not epilepsy, but likely a brain “legion” (sorry). Recall that Amfortas duplicates the symptoms of his own patients (the hand convulsion). His “twin” informs him that yes, he had a part in the murders. The haunting question is, can Amfortas, like Karras before him, be redeemed?
Also the name “Amfortas” is taken from the Grail myth. Amfortas was the Fisher King who chronically/eternally suffered from a debilitating wound. In fact, his wound (said to be in the thigh and symbolic of physical and spiritual impotence) is called “The Amfortas Wound”. Hence Blatty’s Dr. Amfortas also suffers from a chronic psychological (the problem of pain) wound – and a neurological (his lesion and the altered state it causes) wound.
So – yes, I’d say that Amfortas is the guilty party vis a vis the murdered priest in the confessional. He had access to the surgical shears and the succinocholine. But I don’t know if he can be termed a true catatonic – the brain lesion is probably classified as a different type of illness in neuropsychology.
If the topic is fixing the finale, lots of us are on record that it cannot be fixed because the entire film is toxic all the way thru. Short of re-shooting the whole thing, what can be done?
Yeah, I thought the normally excellent Morricone flopped with this musical score (maybe acting out his rebellion against the obnoxious material?). I thought Regan’s Theme was sweet and melancholy, but for that very reason it was obtrusive amid the junkiness of its surroundings…
The marginalized, oppressed people of Jesus’ society (children, women, “sinners”, outcasts) were allowed an avenue of venting, namely, spirit possession.
Issues that could not be directly confronted, or confronted with extreme difficulty, were able to be voiced in the temporary state of possession, wherein the individual – by definition “not him/herself” and “outside or beside him/herself” – might express without overt punishment “taboo” issues. Exorcism would address such issues and return the sufferer to a degree of social function. Jesus’ exorcisms probably went much further in their radicality.
One of Jesus’ “hard” sayings was “Unless you hate your family you have no part of me”. Far from making hatred of family a condition of discipleship, Jesus may have simply been observing the fact that many of those who came to him in fact had been cast out of their families.
Certainly the social pressures that could in some cases result in possession might cause those concerned to repudiate their families and seek a new surrogate kind of family.
Indeed, this is what seems to have happened with Jesus and many of his disciples: they came out of their old families and entered a new family provided by Jesus’ group(Matthew 12:47-50).
Even today the church attempts to restore possessed people into fellowship, though usually without the radical effects that Jesus’ exorcisms originally had.
Interesting studies of Jesus, shamanism, possession and exorcism can be found in:
Morton Smith: Jesus the Magician. Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark (books). “Jesus’ Attitude Toward the Law” (article).
I.M Lewis: Ecstatic Religion.
Stevan Davies: Jesus the Healer.
Amidst the “scary” locust swarm, Lamont has a vision of Merrin (like TVYNS has Karras see a vision of his mother) just before sacrificing his life for Blair, Fletcher, Sharon, and the world. This rubs out the obnoxious Lamont character and hints that he “went to heaven”. A truly stupid scenario, but quite in keeping with this truly aberrated film. OTOH, if we’re trying to “fix” the finale based only on juggling/cutting existing footage – forget it. A poison turkey is poisoned in all its parts.
