CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Certainly does look like it. Wow. For those that can’t make it out, that’s the soul of his left shoe with has hand visible behind.
No, it’s his sole, not soul!
Talk about a Freudian slip …
😉
I just got around to reading your suggestion, and it probably would be an improvement. Good ideas.
However, I also agree that to fix the film, one would almost have to shoot an entirely new film to incorporate the few good scenes, and even these would have to be heavily edited or dubbed to remove the clumsiness and unintentional humor.
I'd say that he's right to withhold his money. A school that represents itself as “Catholic” should maintain some standards, (whether or not I happen to agree with the standards). Based upon this, I'd agree that their choice of honored speakers is suspect.
However, if Georgetown is taking “government” money, then perhaps they have to accomodate all views. Sorry, but that's the deciding factor. Who's paying the piper?
Although I consider the film pretty good as delivered, I appreciate the work that went into the re-creation, and find it a most interesting alternative. I recommend it to all.
I saw it the month in opened. I was a college student. at that time.
There was still a lot of mega-hype going on, so I really didn't know what to expect. I'd grown up watching horror films whenever possible, so I wasn't too upset, but I'll imagine that it was pretty shockingt to well-behaved moviegoers. I do recall hearing gasps and nmervous laughter every time that a horrifying scene concluded.Â
Yes. I attended a Catholic college in the 1970s. Teillhard was very popular (posthumously) with Catholics trying to reconcile their faith with science. Â
granville1 said:
…
 a simple wall hanging that reads, “What we give to the poor is what we take with us when we die”.
…
I've always remembered that too. Was that something spoken by some well-known theologian, or just a bit of greeting card wisdom?
No question in my mind.Â
E3 is a clever and creepy follow-on to the landmark film, with a fine cast and good effects.Â
E2 is a misfire in just about every departtment.
Jagged said:
… Warner's were very unhappy about it as there was a ban on photos of the makeup at the time. They could do nothing about it though as they were just drawings, but it was evident someone had supplied the artist with stills to work from. Despite his claims he sat through the movie multiple times and did them from memory.
An old tradition, similar to what the media did when cameras weren't permitted in courtrooms: they hired artists to make sketches.
Â
I remember that the Famous Monsters editor suggested that you run right out and buy extra copies of the issue, mainly as a collector's item. But one other suggested use was to decorate your room with the pictures.
Arrrgh! Much as I like the film, those are about the last thing I'd want on my bedroom walls!
Father Bowdern said:
After a lengthy talk with good friend and director of the film, The Exorcist, Billy Friedkin candidly remarked about his two brief cameos in his top-reigning horror movie. While Friedkin is somewhat easily discernable as an onlooker during the filming of the faux movie “Crash Course”, his most cleverly subdued appearance is that of the cab driver in the film’s most iconic scene in which Father Merrin arrives at the MacNeil home.
Friedkin remarked, “As you know, I’m a very egoless and modest person. However, I felt a true compulsion somewhere deep within me to be a part of the very celluloid of what turned out to be such a timeless and classic film. You could say the, ‘The devil make me do it,’ but it was much more in my mind’s eye to be a part of this unbeknownst historical film.â€
Father Bowdern
Heck, I was guessing the bum, or one of the ex post facto ghosts.
