CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Wow. I am very intrigued by all of this. Wonderful ideas there, Father Lamont!
And the idea of this re-edit being so good it unifies the two other classic Exorcist films and either prequel (“There can only be one!” ๐ ), it sounds like quite an undertaking, but if anyone can make it happen, why not a fan? ๐ Good luck! I look forward to checking this out!
M.I.K.E.
Couldn’t it have been Chris or Sharon, checking the window after or before checking up on Regan? Lotsa different possibilities. I do like, however, the idea of it being Regan; much more interesting.
M.I.K.E.
Thank you, Hatter.
Yeah, I’d have certainly been interested in reshoots (if Schrader got his wish to stay on board) along those lines. Reshoots in general are completely not out of the ordinary in Hollywood. But if they stuck to the kind of reshoots you describe, that may have been the ticket… before Morgan Creek decided on a completely different film to make from scratch.
There’s one scene that they shot later on to scare things up but never finished — the Francis posession, a scene which echoes the “posession of the younger priest while Merrin’s away” scene after the exorcism in the Friedkin film. That alone may have been enough. Apparently it was too awkward, so they nixed it rather quickly. But unline LEGION, Blatty’s original cut, maybe this footage will remain preserved long enough for some kind of special edition DVD. MAYBE. ๐
M.I.K.E.
And didn’t he reject the offer to direct the original film, too? ๐ I think so. Had he been interested in the first place or not, at least history played out with Boorman doing the terrible sequel with someone else doing the original. And good thing he didn’t direct BOTH. Keeping his name and “genius” constricted to The Heretic isn’t all bad. ๐
M.I.K.E.
“Iรขโฌโขll grant, however, that the removal of the medal at the Iraq dig might be seen to รขโฌลfree upรขโฌย the evil in the hole where the Pazuzu amulet is discoveredรขโฌยฆ”
That is a compelling notion, Granny! ๐ฎ Food for thought. Thanks. ๐ If that’s the case, it now HAS a reason for being found there! ๐ฎ
M.I.K.E.
Yes. Excaliber dazzles and Deliverance is disgustingly harrowing.
Good stuff. And I’ve avoided the rest by managing to sleep through Zardoz and the calling it quits. ๐
M.I.K.E.
Nice, subtle, effective work there, Hatty.
Here’s a new challenge for ya, should you feel like it: Edit in the Gemini head morph sequence from the trailer. No pressure, of course. ๐
M.I.K.E.
“There is no greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friend.รขโฌย -Jesus Christ
So when instead someone suicides, it does not reflect Christ’s example and sacrifice; it’s meaningless, displays no love toward another, and is a sin. An unforgivable sin, with no room or opportunity for repentance. And thus a real, real tragedy and shame. As least with sacrificing oneself for someone else’s well-being, there is a positive; and example is made, and a reminder to all that living for others, first living for God, is the best way of all. And specifically, we don’t have to die to help those around us, but we can be on the lookout to go without, to sacrifice, smaller, everyday things, with our fellow man and woman in mind, friends or strangers.
My two preachy cents. ๐
M.I.K.E.
Great ideas and insight, Granny!
It would have been better if Christ was part of the Morning’s exorcism equation, even if he just said, “Damien, may Christ save you” or something. Without Christ, it’s an affliction that just doesn’t seem to quite need an exorcism or anything holy. Why go to all that trouble but forget to “bring” Christ.
Of course, it’s been a while since I’ve seen the film, maybe Christ is mention at least once. ๐
Flame away. ๐
M.I.K.E.
The corpus is facing away?!! Either Blatty did it as sabotage in retribution to Morgan Creek (making the exorcist of said shoe-horned exorcism appear inept… foreshadowing his selfless, noble, a-pealing fate? Sorry, bad pun. ๐ ), or it was a pure accident on the part of Blatty, Williamson, someone.
You’d think Blatty wouldn’t have let that one go. ๐ฎ
M.I.K.E.
Bravo. Yes. Great analysis and re-cap, Granville. And, let me add… Blatty’s chance to finally work with Nicol Williamson. ๐
I need to revisit this film and forgive the Morgan Creek meddling. It does have a lot going for it.
M.I.K.E.
Welcome! New fans here are always great. ๐
The answer I’d like to tell you is: The Demon (Pazuzu or whomever… is up for debate in another thread here) simply has lots of demonic powers and exhibits them in different ways and on different occasions; hence the differences of such between those found in THE EXORCIST, and now in THE EXORCIST III (there is no “II” in this trilogy… if you ask me, and many, many other folks around these parts!). As for why he was scared, everybody’s different and acts differently from time to time; Morning might be typically brave, but here just buckles under the pressure; hard to say. As for what the demon did to him, that’s his face getting pulled off. You didn’t recognize that? ๐
Now as for the real answer to all of this:
Morgan Creek shoe-horned this exorcism sequence, and thus, this particular exorcist — Father Morning — into this film. These elements weren’t even present or conceived of until it was decided, “A William Peter Blatty film featuring peripheral characters from the first film needs an exorcism! And let’s get Jason Miller in there somewhere, too! Who cares that Lee J. Cobb and O’Malley are unavailable… The more original actors in this film the better — the closer it will resemble the original Exorcist film. Every little bit helps!” In short, the exorcism and exorcist therein are really and truly pointless when you consider the kind of story Blatty intended to make before Morgan Creek at the last minute deemed it not scary enough and… made the film their own, as they did more than a decade later with that other “not scary enough” Exorcist sequel, the original prequel that this time already had an exorcism so they decided, “let’s just remake the whole thing.” The Exorcist III was just a warm-up for them in dumbing-down. But unfortunately for The Exorcist III, Blatty’s original version of the film is history — lost — whereas with Paul Schrader’s scrapped prequel, it got both a theatrical release and a DVD.
I hope I’ve helped. ๐
M.I.K.E.
Good ideas, guys. Never thought of those!
Heck, maybe Paz never left Karras’ body in the 1973 film. I know, I know, heresy. ๐
M.I.K.E.
