CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Father Bowdern said:
When TVYNS came out, I could clearly see why Friedkin chose to cut the scenes of Blair at the doctor’s office. It’s God-awful acting. Case in point: when Blair is attempting to “act” out the scene of flighty behavior, while humming, followed by her passing out, her acting is in accord with a very camera-conscious clumsiness that makes the scene implausible. Friedkin knew what he was doing, and I praise his editing decisions in the original version of the film despite the small commotion about the transitional scene regarding Regan’s sudden (and unknown) illness at the end of the party scene.
Oh, well … I digress.
Another Bonus! Here’s a link to the snippets I posted on here called, “Speaking in Tongues.” Enjoy!
Father Bowdern
I totally agree. I think Friedkin’s editing was solely responsible for making Blair’s performance what it was.
She was bloody awful in that medical examination scene.I’ve got a copy. I’ll try and get it scanned this week. Do you want all the Dick Smith related stuff or just sections pertaining to the Exorcist?
Had quite a few in my time. Not for a long while now, but they are certainly terrifying when they do occur.
Lets face it, near everyone working in Hollywood is prone to massive exaggeration when it comes to self publicity and they are all notoriously litigious to an extreme. In the end Dietz lied no less than Friedkin did, it was just their motivations that were different. Is it possible she has a copy of the reel? Entirely possible, but as a known fibber she can’t be trusted can she.
As to the shooting of the reel. It’s well documented that it was shot by Friedkin not an assistant (there is film of it on one of the youtube clips that Justin has linked to here) supposedly as a makeup test and later optically doubled onto Blair’s visage.
It was allegedly inspired by the Demon mask from Kaneto Shindô’s Onibaba, which Friedkin cited as inspiration, although I’ve always felt it was a direct rip of Lon Chaney Senior’s Phantom of the Opera makeup.
My own feeling was Friedkin probably knew what he was going to do with this footage quite early in production, if not all along. Hence his publicity claims of “strange double exposures” appearing and part of his motivation for wanting to keep Dietz’s involvement quiet and credit free.
Friedkin knew well that Movie Magic is greatly enhanced by the use of the rumour mill to spread disinformation and assist with the casting of the spell on the audience. With the Exorcist he used it to full effect. Even today I only trust 50% of what he tells us about it.
Father Bowdern said:
Well put, Rat. But, I’m afraid if horror films of today don’t include a few titty scenes and CGI, WPM and WF are screwed. Can you imagine how the crucifix masturbation will be filmed by today’s youth standards? That’s right … no more of that whimppy cut-away scene crap; we’ll have to endure penetration scenes!
Father Bowdern
You know, that’s one scene I would actually like to see redone the way it was described in the book. Masturbation rather than genital mutilation. I can fully respect the cutaway, there is no need for close ups, but it would have been far more shocking if the action had been lascivious as opposed to the brutal wounding that was portrayed on screen.
We may well all still refer to it as the crucifix masturbation scene, but it plainly wasn’t, it’s more like a vicious stabbing.
I always felt that was a major cop out, moreso after the debate and publicity it garnered. Don’t get me wrong, still the most shocking scene in the film but far from what it was capable of being.Father Bowdern said:
did you notice how impossible it would have been for Karras to crash through Regan’s window and land on the steps leading down to M Street? The facade wing was pretty amazing back then to pull off the trick, but it still doesn’t make sense from the film perspective does it (even if you think about the different levels from M to Prospect)?
Father Bowdern
Even more amusing is that however hard I try I have never been able to reconcile the external and internal layouts of the property as shown on the film.
Of course I’m pretty sure Blatty chose and described what was in reality an empty spot with a house that wasn’t really there on purpose. Saved any potential ghouls hanging out and harassing the owners. It’s only with the movie that the existing house became associated. I guess it was far cheaper to adapt, extend and use the existing property than to build a complete false property, a brick colonial covered in ivy as Blatty described, overlooking the steps.Father Merrin said:
Happy New Year 🙂
Personally I think the last 10 years was pants, felt like the whole world was devolving.
We had Terrorism, Illegal Wars, The Failure of Politics, Global Warming, Celebrity Culture, it’s like everyone just took leave of their senses. Good thing I suppose is when you hit rock bottom the only way is up, so it’s not all bad.
So I’m glad to see the back of the noughties & I’m gonna temporarily put my sceptism aside for a minute & look forward to this new decade. 🙂
Sounds like every other decade I can remember 😉
Happy new year guys and gals.“Signs in the sky” possibly refers to Jesus’ who said his return and the end of days will be signaled by signs in the sky. It could just be a generalisation and not refer to anything specific. The star of Bethlehem was a sign in the sky. Comets are supposed to be portents of doom. The demon could be referring to superstition in general. I’d have to re-read the passage to be more certain but I don’t have a copy of the book anywhere near me.
Demons were thought by ancient cultures to inhabit a void (empty space) belonging neither to this physical plain of reality nor heaven or hell. It is a term often used to refer to the heavens (outer space) but I suspect not in this instance.
J73 said:
Maybe I misread/misunderstood the passages. I thought that the Howdy subliminals were spliced in from a test reel, suggesting that there would be more of this footage.
No you got it right. It is supposedly just a short reel of Dietz mouthing and stretching her face. I don’t think you are missing much of anything.
Timothy said:
are you all stupid or something?? possession and excorcism is not real!!!
idiotsNo… are you sure? Well riddle me this then… If there’s no devil, where do all my socks go? Eh? Hah!
