granville1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 961 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27162
    granville1
    Participant

    Ah, very good catch, Fr. B.

    ร‚ย 

    ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Why was Karras snubbed during Exorcist II ? #27140
    granville1
    Participant

    Thanks, Regan. Too bad the guy isn't suited to honest, informed discussion. Some folks are just like that, I see them over on the imdb discussion boards with some frequency…

    in reply to: Why was Karras snubbed during Exorcist II ? #27138
    granville1
    Participant

    Thanks, RatBoy, for your kind words. Beelzebub's problem is that his mental capacities do not match the subject's depth, not to mention that he's angry and jumps the gun most of the time.ร‚ย 

    I am no longer replying to him, but as an example of his “thinking”, he dissed me because I took Boorman to task for having Pazuzu blurt out his name to Merrin right off the bat. I explained that the exorcist has to “fish” for the demon's name, since to gain the demon's name is to gain power over the demon.ร‚ย 

    I explained further that both Beelzebub and Boorman overlooked this enormous gaffe. Beelzebub then yelled at me, saying that “sometimes” demons do give their names, citing the demon who told Jesus that his name was “Legion”.

    Here we see empty-headed Beelzebub missing the point in the usual major way. The Gospel demon did not blurt out his name to Jesus. On the contrary, Jesus had to ask or command that the demon reveal its name – thereby proving my point that demons don't just give away their names. They need to be prodded. Typically, Beelzebub colossally messed up my point, defended Boorman's error, defended his own/Beelzebub's error, and then had the nerve to label me ignorant … even though from the beginning, I had correctly explicated and judged the issue.

    The guy's a fanatic and just not bright enough to understand the complexities The Exorcist raises. And he doesn't have the internal feedback loop that would tell him he's making a complete ass of himself. Perhaps he's more deserving of pity than scorn, but scorn is much more fun.

    in reply to: Q: Who plays the possessed Regan in Exorcist 2? #27123
    granville1
    Participant

    It is definitely not Blair, who refused to re-do any of the demon makeup from the original film.

    Nor do I believe it is Eileen Dietz, because by then she was “big” enough to be credited, and (matter of taste) her facial structure is very different from the mystery actress who plays the young Regan in Heretic. The only accrediting for the young Regan in Heretic is one “Karen Knapp” – who, however, only played the voice of Pazuzu after a previous male actor's voice was deemed inappropriate. Sorry I couldn't be of help, maybe some Heretic scholar could fill you in.

    in reply to: Prequel Weaknesses: “THE” Exorcism – spolers – #27121
    granville1
    Participant

    Ya know, he posted all this recent stuff after I politely asked him to keep his posting to one or two issues at a time. Apparently that reasonable condition was much too stringent for his (in)delicate sensibilities and he spewed multiple messages again. And you're right, he didn't earn Pazuzu wings, but only the wings of Mickey the Mosquito.

    in reply to: Prequel Weaknesses: “THE” Exorcism – spolers – #27119
    granville1
    Participant

    Poor bedeviled Beelzebub just earned his dark wings and a status of Perpetual Ignore from yours truly. Although there is a sadistic sense of pleasure at contemplating all the toil that he put into his shallow, angry posts รขโ‚ฌยฆ the wasted effort itself is a pleasing sight in itself.

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27103
    granville1
    Participant

    Thanks … apparently she must have been ripping it out consistently enough that they must have given up on it, since it's not in subsequent scenes.

    in reply to: Prequel Weaknesses: “THE” Exorcism – spolers – #27100
    granville1
    Participant

    That's a simple enough solution – just ignoring them is poifect ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: “La plume de ma tante.” #27097
    granville1
    Participant

    The Thomas Allen book suggests that Robbie had an unhealthy relationship with his aunt รขโ‚ฌโ€œ supposedlly she got him into the occult, and Allen suggests there may have been an element of sexual molestation in the relationship. Robbie's symptoms began soon after his aunt died. However, I've never heard that it was supposed to be the aunt herself who was possessing Robbie.

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27091
    granville1
    Participant

    Glad you found Capt Howdy, welcome ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Was The Beggining/Dominion inended to be duology ? #27088
    granville1
    Participant

    Yeah, though more “authentic” than The Beginning's full-on Pazuzu, Dominion's version was not as visually impressive.

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27085
    granville1
    Participant

    u r welcome – glad to know ya on both Howdy and imdb ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27083
    granville1
    Participant

    And Regan, in case you didn't know, I'm bastasch8647 on imdb ๐Ÿ™‚

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27077
    granville1
    Participant

    Broken nose or fractured nose might explain the bandaging, thanks, I hadn't thought of that.

    in reply to: Regan’s facial “gear”? #27074
    granville1
    Participant

    Also, our posts seem to be posting promptly again.

    ร‚ย 

    So thanks to Jason and all who worked on getting this fixed ๐Ÿ™‚

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 961 total)