[sterngeoff]

‘Religious Film’ is possibly not as widely recognised a genre as ‘Horror Film’, though. In fact, I don’t think I’d ever heard of it before now! Which other ‘religious films’ are there? “Jesus Christ Superstar”? No, wait, that’s a musical. “The Thorn Birds”? No, that’s a kind of a romantic drama. Mmm. Maybe there’s no such genre as ‘religious films’. Is “The Elephant Man” a ‘medical film’, then?
No, “The Exorcist” is exactly the same type of film as “The Wizard Of Oz” and “Star Wars”: A fantasy film. The events it depicts are completely impossible and fantastical, have no basis in scientific fact and are the very reason that the premise of the film works at all. Billy Friedkin has shot “The Exorcist” using his claustrophobic, uncomfortably tight and intrusive style, which makes the audience’s ‘suspension of disbelief’ no effort at all. Through his lens, you get side by side with all of the characters in this drama. There’s so much noise, heat, light, shit, piss and vomit you can easily fall for it being real life. It truly is a brilliant film, but as I say, it’s a fantasy. It has as much to do with ‘religion’ as “The Full Monty” has to do with the steel industry. If anything, Friedkin overplays the visceral, all too painfully physical aspects within the tale to show them up more starkly against the flimsiness of the ‘gospels’, the ‘scriptures’ (themselves pure fairy-tales) which many of the main characters define themselves by. In the final reel, it’s not thoughtful reflection or an appeal to his better nature which defeats the baddie, he gets thrown out of a god damned window and down the god damned stairs. Hurrah! Just like in “Star Wars”.

“The Exorcist” is quite rightly regarded as one of the finest films ever made. With no disrespect to it’s writer, this is mainly due to it’s director.
However, it is so good, so spellbinding, that many people believe it to be many other things, when all it is is a fantasy film.

I get passes.

[sterngeoff]

!!!

[Author]

Posts