CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You are a very observant man, Granville. This is something seemingly rare these days with filmgoers, which possibly is attributed to the lower quality of films these days. I often see a lot of symbology in Orson Welles’ films and many people think I’m crazy despite the fact that Welles admitted he put a lot of it in his films. Now if one were to say that Luis Bunuel’s films had symbology might be incorrect (connecting to Capn’s point about making any film your own with your personal perspective), but that is beside my overall point. Your astuteness has always impressed me, sir. 🙂
This is some fantastic info you’ve got here on the film, guys! Considering that I’m working on the Ninth Configuration essay for the film, these should help me a lot! I’ve been struggling looking for more info on my critique, but these should work out for now. 😀
Thanks, Granville. Those films I listed are just some examples. I would have listed (if I remembered at the time) Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Dracula (The Tod Browning original with Bela Lugosi), The Quatermass films, Fiend Without A Face, Thr Twilight Zone TV show, Alfred Hitchcock Presents, The Innocents, Night Gallery, Something Wicked This Way Comes, Jaws 2, Dawn of the Dead, the original Friday the 13th (more psychological than any of the others), and Halloween III (by the same writer of The Quatermass films). Just more examples if not more obscure. 😉
To clarify things even more, is this the version without Friedkin’s new blue tints and blueish filters? It’s the actual original brownish-green colors of the original print?
Yes, he was in fact murdered three years after The Exorcist. So I guess for a while, Kinderman’s joke didn’t age well until the next generation forgot who Sal Mineo was.
Anyway, I think its still a friendly, silly jab that actually honors Sal Mineo in the end.
Well, it’s all a taste issue in the end. I’d admit that it must be pretty hard to be romantically involved with someone who had at one point such grotesque makeup on her and would worry if a terrifying subliminal would show up on her face. Oh what a horrifying practical joke that would be if she pulled that off for anyone somehow. 😀
I don’t think horror films have really evolved for the better since the 70’s and early 80’s. Minus some films like the first two Scream films and maybe a couple others, yet the horror genre is probably one of the worst genres in film history for its blantantly crude showmanship and lack of subtilety. A lot of old horror films if you go back to the days of censorship (that was the ultimate limit to their frontier) had to scare audiences with atmosphere/mood, suspense and anticipation, and using the psychological tendency for audiences to imagine far worse than what is happening on screen. That is why films like Nosferatu, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, The Invisible Man, The Thing 1951, Psycho, Night of the Living Dead, The Exorcist, Jaws, Suspiria, Halloween, Alien, The Shining, The Thing 1982, and A Nightmare on Elm Street were so effective for what minimalist actions they took. This is something many modern horror films do not succeed in accomplishing. We seem to be living in a period where we wish to see the worst of human debauchery and mutilation, and I don’t really understand that. Many of the films I’ve listed from that earlier period understood that the most terrifying aspects of horror is how it can be closely identified with common events in life. Even when horror is at its most fantastic, it’s still grounded in reality. And when you take a concept like people being tortured or mutilated, it’s far too over the top for someone to not think of as purely exploitive. Master horror storytellers knew their limits and knew how to use them to their advantage.
The Innocents is an excellent film! One of the most atmospheric and best photographed horror films of the day. Very classic ghost story with a hint of demonic-like possession. Deborah Kerr gives an amazing performance, is at her most beautiful and motherly; all combined with a chilling score! 😀
I just remember Jason Robards being incredibly compassionate in the film for his character whereas Jonathan Pryce, on the other end of the spectrum, was incredibly creepy as Mr. Dark. 😉
Hi, guys!
Just to let you know I finally got see the film, but wasn’t in the position to do a short review till now.
The film, Bug, is everything you would expect from William Friedkin. The script, adapted directly by its playwright to the screen (just like in the case of Blatty), is top notch and is verbatim of the play. Ashley Judd is excellent as a main female protagonist struggling to keep herself away from the dangers of the outside. She gives us an incredibly natural, yet powerful performance of an incredibly lonely, but strong woman. Like Ellen Burstyn, Judd gives us a tour de force performance of a woman losing control of everything.
Her character’s main fears are directed at her ex-husband played by the ever-impressive Harry Connick, Jr. His character constantly ‘invites’ himself into her motel room to remind her of her obligations as a wife even though they are very obviously apart. Connick Jr.’s extremely instrusive approach to the film by chewing up the scenary as much as possible is a genuinely welcomed approach to playing such a dispicible, subpar version of a man. Rounding off the main cast is Michael Shannon, the only actor in the film to originate his character off of the original Broadway stage production. Although not exclusively a film actor (much like Jason Miller and Fr. William O’Malley), Shannon brings his uncanny theatricality and unrepressed physicality to the table; wrapping up the film’s main triangle of characters. The rest of the cast is as well superb, but not as important as this central triangle.
The overall premise of two people seeing bugs that are not really there is a familar late-1990’s-2000’s concept of psychological delusion, but it is a rather fresh take on the idea. Unlike films like Pi, Fight Club, and A Beautiful Mind where there are non-existent people, this film exploits the unseen terror much like Jaws and Predator. However in this story, it is all in their heads. The only thing that comes close to confirming the possiblity of real bugs are subliminals of our characters’ random thoughts of insects. The overall theme of the film also does add more to what such a concept presents: ‘if two people are seeing non-existent things together, in a sense are they better in-tune with each other than anyone else is with them?’ It is a rather sad and scary concept in that classic Friedkin disturbing sense of irony that our two main characters, Judd and Shannon, fall in love for a deep sense of belonging while sharing this mad delusion of non-existent bugs. Although there is another film titled Bug (based on a book called The Hephaestus Plague) that came out the same time as Jaws in 1975 and directed by who would become the director of Jaws’ best sequel Jaws 2– Jeannot Szwarc, his film expounds on the subject of obsession toward real, misunderstood bugs whereas Friedkin’s Bug expounds on a similar obsession of bugs except with a more Franz Kafka outlook. You could call it a difference in 20th century obsessions and 21st century obsessions (despite the Bug play was written in the 90’s, it was still ahead of its time).
In conclusion, it is a film where if you’re not possibly familar with the play and its, at times, deliberate theatrical satire (which was obviously put there to lighten the horrific moods at times), or are not willing to see Friedkin go all out with the blood spewing, literally teeth crackling exploits– then this film is probably not for you. If this is not the case, this will probably be a great Friedkin experience that will remind you of the days of The French Connection and The Exorcist with his signature subliminals, clever editing, and bizarre imagery. Vintage Friedkin for the 21st century.
😀
Usually three:
Halloween
Halloween III: The Season of the Witch (which I think is sadly underrated and misunderstood, I have plenty of explanation why)
and of course The Exorcist.Every once in a year (of course) it can be changed around with The Shining, Suspiria, or Night of the Living Dead coming in there.
😉
By the way, Something Wicked This Way Comes is a movie I’ve been wanting to see again in years, Granville! Do you have it on DVD?
Fantastic topic, Blizzi! There should be more threads like this more often! 😉
Best: (technically speaking) Psycho, North By Northwest, and Rear Window are way up there!!!
Worst: (technically speaking again) The Paradine Case
Fav: Vertigo!!! (Rope is pretty close for me as well!)
😉
The film has just come out Friday. I’ll let you guys know what I think. Please anyone else who sees it– comment. 😉
That’s not a diaper, Lamont. A lot of people in a large part of the eastern world wear only one piece of clothing like that even today (especially in hot climates). And it’s a little difficult to think of any other way for the demon to motion an attack in a wide shot other than the moving of his hands.
