CaptainHowdy.com The #1 Exorcist Fansite Since 1999
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
No, I think he means just before he says “No rats”, when Karl first appears at the doorway, the instant before her candle flames up. Its a good question, I could never figure it out either. I think its in another language, probably Swiss since that’s what Karl’s origin was.
That scene wasn’t in the book> Personally I always thought it was kind of a cheap scare tactic, really incidental to the story.Granville got it right, its an expression of his feeling of guilt, he ran but she was gone before he could get to her. Interesting theory about the stairs, but thats kind of a stretch. There are lots of hard surfaces.
No Pazuzu really had nothing to do with the subway scene. That scene was to show Karras struggling with issues of faith, turning his back on the bum as if it were an intrusion. Pazuzu spoke in the voice of the bum later as part of its mind game, just like when it spoke as Burke Dennings, or Karras’ mother, etc.
But who can say what would happen if? I dont think there are too many scientific accounts of “demonic possession”.Incidentally, the theory of subliminal images and advertising has been subsequently challenged over the years, especially after the guy who did the original research admitted that he lied about the findings. So there is also no evidence that real subliminal editing ever had any effect on the Unconcious mind.)
Jagged, the definition of subliminal that you gave describes it as being below the conscious level, and is quite accurate. The theory of subliminal messages was that you wouldn’t know it was happening, but it would somehow influence your behavior UNCONCIOUSLY. Thats what is meant by “operate”. There remains no evidence of any subliminal imagery in the Exorcist. The images in question are scary because WE SEE THEM.
He was most definitely mocking Karras. I agree with Paul, that scene and others is explained much better in the novel, where the demon had much, much more character development. The demon had personal knowledge of each person in the house, and played it against them. ie: He knew that Sharon fantasized about Karras, and told him when she was in the room. He knew about Willie and Karl’s junkie daughter in Harlem… And yes, he knew of Karras’ crisis of faith – He knew all their weaknesses, and used it against them.
I dont think you’re hearing me, so I will say it again. There is no subliminal imagery in The Exorcist.
Well gosh, I was trying to have an intelligent conversation about this, I didn’t expect to get bullied. If you used the word inappropriately, why not just acknowledge it? Quick, scary edits don’t qualify as “subliminal”. I dont understand how longstanding fans of this film, like myself, would want to perpetuate hype like that? It’s just plain gossipy and misleading. There is no “subliminal” editing anywhere in “The Exorcist”. There never was. Anybody out there?
LOL, how can something look subliminal? None of it was subliminal, because it was all visible. Subliminal means that it occurs below the concious level. There is no subliminal imagery anywhere in the Exorcist, that was just part of the hype – like saying Led Zeppelin had Satanic messages playing backwards. People wrote sensationalistic articles to sell papers. Friedkin may have even called it “subliminal” when referring to the quick edits in an interview, but it really wasn’t at all. I remember this film and all the hysteria that surrounded it. That was just silly hysteria.
To answer your question Mr Howdy, I just think “subliminal” is misleading, and feeds some of the silliness that surrounded the movie, like when some people said that “evil was encoded into the film”! Had Friedkin wanted to add subliminal images (like single frame edits) to the Exorcist they could have done so very easily. In the 70s subliminal editing did exist, and was even used in some advertising. The demon face edits were not intended to be subliminal, they were designed to be quick, scary flashes – visible to the naked eye. So whats wrong with calling them “quick edits” or “flashes”? I mean, that’s what an editor would call them.
