Quote:
Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction
Surprises me that someone thinks Exorcist is merely "okay" - it's a remarkable piece of cinema. Horror or otherwise.
|
Agreed. You know that old saying that the best movies are successful for all the wrong reasons? Well, if that was true in 1973, I'd say we're seeing some fallout from the "most shocking motion picture experience" reputation it has.
This is a movie that has a brilliant script, equally brilliant performances, and doesn't have an ounce of fat on it. Plus, it's got Mr. Grit himself, Billy Friedkin in his prime, behind the camera.
And, although it's not strictly an age thing, it seems like many younger people are distracted by the fact that they're not viscerally afraid from the opening scene. Their parents and older folks have been crowing about it for years, how it traumatized them, how they slept with the light on for weeks afterward (that's me!), and their reaction is, "This?"
Hey, I still think it's pretty damned scary (as much as that can be true for a movie), but these days I find myself more captivated by what a skillful piece of work it is -- how purposeful, how direct, how intelligent, and how authentic it is about the characters it contains.
It's funny, watching this again, I tried to catalog what would be excised (
) if it were made today. No Iraq, no Mama Karras, no lengthy and methodical conversations between Karras and Chris MacNeil, or Karras and Kinderman, or Kinderman and Chris...
What would be left? Peeing on the rug, crucifix in the crotch, swiveling head and a few added scenes of mischief? But why would we care?