ManInKhakiExorcist

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 520 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Why is Pazuzu in Karras’ dream? #17053
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Good point. Regarding the “You! They sent you?!” line, however, I might suggest the demon was merely being sarcastic as ever. I mean, Karras’ faith crisis should have been easy for the demon to detect supernaturally from the get-go; he may have been strong in the faith in months or years past, but now he’s growing weak and is on shakey ground, not quite the formidable opponent of godliness Merrin ultimately is considered to have become. If it’s not meant as sarcasm by the demon, that line just makes me think of… the demon opening a door to a house and finding someone they fear on the other side.

    Since the demon is supernatural, though, “opening a door” is beneath it — it traverses the spiritual realm and should be able to see things almost instantly; the person’s physical exterior, and how they live their life, not necessarily what can be “read” on the heart, soul, or conscience. So, I don’t see why this line wouldn’t be sarcasm; Karras is facing tough times and accordingly wouldn’t be as much of a threat than had he been more trusting in God and willing to perserve in lieu of throwin in the towel — or cloth, as it were.

    But if my “dream search” theory above is accurate — even if just for the movie (who knows?) — maybe that’s explained by the idea of Satanic forces sneaking into someone’s “core” to get the full view of the individual’s spiritual status, beyond the “are they sinful?”; demons and Satan already know Man from birth is in bondage to sin — hence the literal inquest into the would-be victim’s soul or core, which is off-limits aside from getting a visual on where the person stands with Christ or doesn’t stand with Him.

    Just some casual conjecture. 🙂

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Mental illness/possession #17055
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Interesting topic. I would just like to add that, as in life, Blatty’s piece of art here — the novel — is full of evidence, non-evidence, and anti-evidence to there being a reality consisting of the spiritual. This is what makes the novel and the film so scary and believeable; it’s realistic, three-dimensional — not simply a 1 or 2-D characature/cartoon. And Friedkin’s documentary style, and the unique tone/voice/style Blatty breathes into the novel help crystalize this.

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Jomo killed THEM, too…? #17045
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Well, of allll films to claim their fake-knife was a prop for, why on earth would they or anyone choose DOMINION (if they want their item to sell)…? It has next-to-no fanbase (a darn shame), AND they’re charging more than the dollar you’ve thoughtfully calculated, Cap. 😉

    Playin’ devil’s advocate here. 😀

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Sarah’s Lab Coat AVAILIBLE! #17021
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    DOMINION-Merrin’s cantine is also on auction, last I checked. Plus, the slain soldier’s knife.

    I still have yet to see something from any of the films that compels me to buy it. Maybe the Paz idol; one of the GOOD reproductions that pop up. Or, yes: the pre-vandalized* Dominion Church interior and exterior sets. Those are amazing to behold, watching the film. Oh yeah, and I’d need a billion dollars first, and a time machine. Sigh.

    M.I.K.E.

    * They were muddied-up and packed with black bird corpses for “purposes” of filming the remake: EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING. Like I said, VANDALISM.

    in reply to: Re: Jomo killed THEM, too…? #17022
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    I’ve always been uder the impression that Jomo (child killer) was also the murderer of the soldiers in the church, and that someone else attempted Francis’ murder.

    Since Francis was shot by arrows (and arranged a la St. Sebastian), it was probably another possessed Turkana tribesman. And so the same conclusion can be reached with Jomo as the killer of the soldiers; we see him make his way toward the church, and we later see how the soldiers’ corpses are re-arranged as Christian imagery; Jomo would surely have done the same with Francis and the kids had he not been interrupted and killed mid-murder rampage. Since he dies, the Devil has another tribesman pick up where Jomo left off, killing Francis later in the film.

    Francis and Merrin are under the impression, after the church murders, that it was the soldiers who did it to themselves, “some kind of acrobatic ritual suicide murder”, to paraphrase Granville. I think it’s even more compelling if a non-white, non-Christian was the culprit. Jomo was overtaken and possessed on different occasions by the Devil or one of his minions. More believable than the soldiers managing their rather-tricky-if-just-them murder-suicide. Or maybe all three were responsible. Thoughts?

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Jomo killed THEM, too…? #17027
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    They simply sell these prop items; they’re not experts of the film, I don’t think; thus, they’re shoe-horning the Nazis into their description, probably with a vague idea of the general plot, how Merrin is introduced in the company of passing-through Nazis. And on a similar note, it’s evident already that the Nazis and British soldiers are presented as a parallel.

    The mention of the Turkana may or be not be something they genuinely thought enough about before suggesting it. As a suggestion of what happened, I still think it totally adds up — Jomo for the soldiers’ murders, and another tribesman for Francis’ murder.

    And the cross — A Christian cross — not sacred…? 😛 It’s arguably in the center of an ancient church. It had to have been a sacred cross, as with everything else found in the church itself, all the fine artwork and artchitecture; it was a sacred place, even if it wasn’t meant as a house of worship… it was still a church. It was sacred even to the thieves who valued it enough to loot from it, and from the altar on which it sat.

    M.I.K.E.

    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    April 2007 ain’t over ’til it’s over. 🙂

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Speaking of Grindhouse… #16961
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    I assure you, Cap, I don’t need to conform to any hatred bandwagon; it’s a genuine waste of time and energy. And, Granny nailed it: Tarantino and/or Rodriguez have more talent and imagination than Renny Harlin ever did or will. I think each new film they’d made post-Desperado and Pulp Fiction have had less to recognize and praise or admire than previous. Not terribly worse and worse, just worse — less enjoyable, more forgettable (ie. literally less memorable). Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction were really special, but now I could wait a decade for his next. Rodriguez’s Once Upon A Time In Mexico and Sin City, great work technically, but all spectacle; style all the way. And Sin City, really, it was so true to the comic book source material, it’s like, “Great, you made a comic book.” It’s the comic book, not a film. Well, sure, it’s a film, but it’s too much the comic book — way to go, Mr. Technical wizard and co. It’s great work, but I could get the same effect by reading the comic book. All that was added that was NEW was audio; woop-de-doo. 😐

    Anyway, E:TB, like Grindhouse, Sin City and Kill Bill, still makes me want to jump in the shower; it’s a gorey romp with spectacle as its chief ambition, and I feel more dirty than impressed, entertained, or enlightended, for sitting through such.

    Just because Tarantino and Rodriguez made their names making great movies doesn’t mean their latest is anything near their greatest — sure, if you like that sort of thing, but I don’t.

    In a sentence: Not caring for any of William Friedkin’s latest (in quite some time) doesn’t take away the fact his early career yielded some real cinematic gems. His, like Tarantino’s and Rodriguez’s highlights, seem to be behind him.

    Our ol’ pal EKM was right about Tarantino (not sure what he thought of Rodriguez): He’s over-rated. But was he always over-rated? Heck no. Reservoir Dogs was new, different, and entertaining for what it was: a violent movie. Pulp Fiction, no different, but more thoughtful. And then, God bless him, Tarantino made his money and now he can do what he apparently wants. I just think it’s a bunch of sugary candy; nothing more. And I really, really wanted to like Kill Bill and beyond, but they only ultimately excelled as plots descriptions on paper. 🙁

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Pan’s Labyrinth #16962
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Devil’s Backbone is excellent. Very much in the same tone of Dominion, indeed. He was one of the first directors associated with the project, which I find just fascinating. Dominion scarier with him directing? Not if he shot the same script Schrader contractually shot. Even so, The Exorcist saga is right up his alley. And/or if a remake ever happens, he’d be the guy to hire, if I were in charge of things. He and Schrader have a wonderful way with actors; creating the horror of real-life tragedy, people at odds with another. Intense and unforgettable.

    Pan’s Labyrinth was good, as well. Best fairy tale flick in ages.

    Hellboy, underwhelming given its source material.

    Did Mike Mignola work on Pan’s Labyrinth at all? I thought I saw his handiwork in places.

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Speaking of Grindhouse… #16965
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Well said, Cap. I agree completely with you here.

    And I genuinely have always recognized, known, and appreciated their love for the craft. I suppose, then, the stories they’re trying to tell just may not appeal to me currently; tastes change, I guess. Am I getting OLD? 😛

    But of all Tarantino’s and Rodriguez’s latest works, I’m actually fairly interested in giving Kill Bill another chance. I consider it Tarantino’s last true film. Death Proof just seemed undercooked, too simple and/or a shameless diaolgue showcase. Worth watching once, but seemed like a fairly cheap gimmick when it was all over. And it’s frustrating — all the genuine talents involved.

    Maybe if the missing reel was included… I may have to give it the benefit of that doubt. Nah. 😛 But the film just seemed like a little sketch, much like his contribution to FOUR ROOMS way back when.

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Social aspects of New Testament possession #16949
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Absolutely, bro. I always enjoy your insight.

    Plus, anytime I can read something about Christ, it’s awesome, no matter what its thesis. The pressures of life too often distract and wear me down, so it helps to get reminders of any kind (partly why I adore THE EXORCIST and its sequels to different degrees). Divine intervention, I’m convinced.

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: Speaking of Grindhouse… #16953
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Who thinks EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING can be considered such?

    Just a thought I had. I get the same dirty feeling watching it I got from the new Tarantino/Rodriguez flick, which despite their love for the “genre” it was underwhelming. I did chuckle at the mock trailers. But all in all, a waste of anyone’s time, GRINDHOUSE. Novel idea, forgettable film.

    Talented, imaginitive guys… once.

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: Re: “The Beginning” on Spike! #16942
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Let us know what the changes/edits are. And most importantly if it’s cut down so much it’s actually watchable. 😉 ENJOY!!! 😀 Wish I had a TV. 🙁

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: WHATS UP WITH THE DOMINION FAN CUT ? #16943
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    I like that last one most. 🙂

    M.I.K.E.

    in reply to: question about exorcist III legion special edition dvd #16944
    ManInKhakiExorcist
    Participant

    Excellent. I stay tuned.

    M.I.K.E.

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 520 total)