200) The Exorcist (1973) - My Defense of William Friedkin's Movie

My 200th  Review!  

"The power of Christ compels you!"

Director

William Friedkin

Cast
Linda Blair - Regan MacNeil
Ellen Burstyn - Chris MacNeil
Max von Sydow - Fr. Lankester Merrin
Jason Miller - Fr. Damien Karras, SJ
Lee J. Cobb - Lt. William Kinderman
Kitty Winn - Sharon Spencer
Jack MacGowran - Burke Dennings

Two-hundred horror movies into this blog! There's just 800 more to go until I reach 1,000. And it only took me since 2018 to get to this many. If I wasn't insane before, I must be now. 

I wanted to interrupt my series of vampire movie commentaries to post something particular for my 200th review. 

Like my 100th review, The Monster Squad, back in 2021, I wanted my 200th entry to be a good one! This time, I wanted to pick a title that would stir the pot...just a little. I wanted to include a horror movie that waves high above other movies in the genre. I wanted number 200 to be on a movie that doesn't cease to be discussed. I wanted a classic, which I know is a word that covers a lot of territory. 

My initial choice was going to be the 1931 movie "Frankenstein" which is an absolutely excellent film. It's one I have a lot of appreciation for. But I changed my mind as I normally do. 

I think a defense of the 1973 movie "The Exorcist" will turn some heads, especially within my little circle of fellow Catholics. I say that because I also think "The Exorcist" is a Catholic movie!

When I started this platform in 2018, I didn't have any plan nor desire to review "The Exorcist." But that changed when I sat through the despicable, abhorrent, lazy, stupid, unpleasant, repulsive, unwelcomed, pretentious and putrid mess of a film, "The Exorcist: Believer." It's a flick that intruded its way into theaters back in 2023. I apologize for mentioning it as I swore I would never bring it up again. So, I decided I wanted to comment on "The Exorcist" at some point. And there's no better time than my 200th horror movie commentary. 

Directed by William Friedkin, "The Exorcist" is a movie that has aged well as a religious picture considering how baseless and politically driven, or "woke" most modern movies have become. Heck, even "The Exorcist: Believer" has been dubbed by critics as the "Woke-cercist." 

I wrote about "The Exorcist" four years ago in a post regarding whether it's still the scariest movie ever. I also reviewed the third movie in the series, "The Exorcist III" if anyone cares what I thought about it. 

Linda Blair as Regan MacNeil in "The Exorcist."

The Plot

The film is based on William Peter Blatty's 1971 novel of the same name. Blatty's story is based on the real exorcism of a 14-year-old boy from Mount Rainier that took place in the late 1940s.

"The Exorcist" centers on 12-year old Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair) who lives with her mother, Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) in a fancy Georgetown home. 

Chris is a film actress and is in Georgetown working on a movie directed by her good friend, Burke Dennings (Jack MacGowran). 

At nearby Georgetown University, Fr. Damien Karras S.J. (Jason Miller) is a psychiatrist who counsels other priests at Georgetown. 

His elderly mother lives by herself in New York. Her health is failing, but she refuses to move out of her apartment and into a care facility close to Fr. Karras.

He tries to convince his mother to move someplace where she'll have the around-the-clock care she needs. All the while Fr. Karras confides to his fellow priest that amidst the turmoil he feels leaving his mother alone in her New York apartment, he thinks he's losing his faith. His work as a priest, counselor, and psychiatrist is overwhelming him. Fr. Karras doesn't think he can cut it anymore. 

In the MacNeil house, shortly after Regan discovers a Ouija board in the basement and plays around with it, her behavior and demeanor start to change. Regan becomes violent and soon, supernatural phenomenon starts taking place around Regan.

Fr. Karras's mother eventually passes away. His heart is not only heavy with sadness, but also with guilt as he wasn't with her when she died. He thinks there's a lot more he could have and should have done. 

Meanwhile, the more hostile and vulgar Regan becomes, medical professionals can't explain what is wrong with her despite all their examinations. 

Chris is at her wit's end. On top of this chaos, when Chris returns home one night and checks on Regan who's fast asleep in her room, she's notified that Burke Dennings was found dead at the bottom of a set of stairs outside Regan's window. Evidence suggests he may have been in Regan's bedroom and somehow fell out of her window. 
Police Detective William Kinderman (Lee J. Cobb) investigates his death, going to Fr. Karras for information as Denning's head was found turned completely around. 

Regan's body develops sores and marks all over. And the medical professionals examining her without any answers suggest that maybe Chris should question the Catholic Church as Regan is showing signs of psychosis and even demonic possession. 

After Chris witnesses Regan attacking herself with a crucifix and then turning her head completely around, speaking in Denning's voice, she's convinced that a demon must be doing this to her daughter.

She consults Fr. Karras who's highly skeptical at first at the notion of demonic possession, but agrees to go visit Regan. 

When he does, Regan claims to be the devil himself. She speaks in different tongues, knows things about Karras that she couldn't possibly know, and has greater strength than what a normal 12-year-old girl would have. The demon inside Regan also tells Fr. Karras that it plans to remain until Regan is dead and decaying in the earth.

After a few more visits, Fr. Karras concludes that the girl needs to see an exorcist. 

He consults with his bishop who gives permission for an exorcism to be conducted, but wants another priest, Fr. Lankester Merrin (Max von Sydow) who has experience with possession and the demonic, to lead it. 

Max von Sydow as Fr. Lankester Merrin in "The Exorcist."

My Thoughts

When "The Exorcist" was released, horror movies were transitioning out of the atomic age of giant monsters attacking cities and space aliens invading earth. The genre was entering a more authentic age with realistic movies that don't follow romantic leads amidst horrific or frightening scenarios. "Rosemary’s Baby" from 1967, which helped launch this sub-genre, "Night of the Living Dead" from 1968, "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" from 1974, and "The Amityville Horror" from 1979 are such movies that come to mind. 

"The Exorcist," released just four years after "Rosemary's Baby," was a movie the likes of which had never been seen before. There is no other movie before it about a demonic possession and Catholic exorcism. It not only tells a story, but it has a documentary tinge to it. 

I've mentioned before that the supernatural/ demonic possession sub-genre of horror movies often makes my eyes roll. They're very few I consider good. Often, they're just forgettable and repetitious.   

These kinds of movies normally depict what Hollywood hack writers think the devil is capable of doing alongside the erroneous way they think God behaves. That is, in some kind of Deist way, these movies too often depict God as an entity too far away, sitting out there somewhere looking down and watching the scene play out but not caring enough to intervene, even when invoked, in the demonic attack the characters are suffering.  

His intervention is one big question mark. Maybe He'll help when invoked by priests or pastors, but don't hold your breath. Is He even listening? Who knows? But the demonic entities in these movies are free to do whatever they please, even kill people in the most gruesome way imaginable. The religious side, no matter how it's depicted, often lose but not before a severe beating.  

"The Exorcist" does depict the devil's activities, which are obviously very disturbing to view for anybody. And God's intervention is depicted as well, but not with the same fireworks and performance the agitated and agonizing demon puts on as seen in other possession movies. However, God's presences and intervention isn't doubted here. It's trusted.

The focus of Regan's possession is more on the grotesque and putrid phenomenon that has been known to take place with severe demonic possessions.  For instance, this kind of activity was witnessed in a demonic possession that took place in Earling, Iowa in 1928 involving a young girl as documented and verified in the book, "Begone, Satan: A Soul Stirring Account of Diabolical Possession in Iowa" by Fr. Carl Vogl. 

"The Exorcist" doesn't quite touch on the demonic mindset and psychological aspect of possession which can be much more frightening than projectile vomit and head-spinning. I mention this in my review of another well-made possession film, "Nefarious." 

In that review, I quoted real life exorcist Fr. Carlos Martin from his interview on a podcast called "Pints with Aquinas."

"['Nefarious'] brought you into the demonic mind which is much more interesting," he says. "That's the realm that I deal with - that an exorcist deals with. And that, I will tell you, at the end of the day is far more frightening. It's far more! If you saw somebody levitate in front of you, it would probably make the hair on the back of your head stand up. The 18th time, would it do that? The 118th time? At a certain point, you move on," 

"The Exorcist" briefly mentions something about the psychological attack that'll come about in the exorcism about to be performed when Fr. Merrin warns Fr. Karras about what's to come. 

"Especially important is the warning to avoid conversations with the demon. We may ask what is relevant but anything beyond that is dangerous. He is a liar. The demon is a liar. He will lie to confuse us. But he will also mix lies with the truth to attack us. The attack is psychological, Damien, and powerful. So don't listen to him," Fr. Merrin says.

I don't know if the film intends such a depiction or if it's my own interpretation, but as the Second Vatican Council had just concluded in 1965, there's a contrast between Fr. Karras and Fr. Merrin that's timely. 

Fr. Merrin is the more traditional "old school" priest while the younger psychiatrist Fr. Karras has a more progressive mindset and ideas that are far from being truly Catholic, such as demonic possession being a thing of the 16th century, and not relevant anymore now that people understand mental illness, schizophrenia, and paranoia much better than they did centuries.  

"It just doesn't happen anymore," he tells Chris MacNeil when she presses him about getting an exorcism, which is far from the truth. 

Exorcism is just as relevant and practiced in the Catholic Church today as it was since Christ instructed His apostles to cast out demons in His name. 

After visiting with Regan, he also tells Chris, "You probably know as much about possession than most priests." Ok....maybe that much is true in the modern conciliar church. 

Such a lapse was surfacing fast in the Catholic Church even before Vatican II. It's no wonder Fr. Karras thinks he's losing his faith.

But the experienced and traditional Fr. Merrin proves him wrong, and surely Fr. Karras stands corrected. 

In the final scene when Fr. Karras tackles the possessed Regan, a St. Joseph medal he still wears around his neck dangles out of his cassock and in the devil's face. The possessed Regan grabs it and tosses it aside, showing that Fr. Karras hasn't completely lost his faith, and the devil is furious about that. He wants to destroy ever last vestige of it within the priest.

When the time comes to confront the devil, it's the traditional-minded Fr. Merrin who leads the exorcism the minute he meets Fr. Karras at the MacNeil's house. Fr. Karras tries to talk about his psychological analysis of the situation with Regan. But Merrin abruptly corrects him, as the kids say, "like a boss." Don't get me wrong, Fr. Karras isn't a bad character. He represents one side of the current state of the church in its battle against evil. 

When the devil taunts Fr. Karras and he lets those taunts get to him, the "old school" Fr. Merrin tells him to leave and proceeds with the exorcism by himself.  

The devil makes it clear he's more threatened by Fr. Merrin. 

Still, both priests cast out the devil in the name of Jesus Christ as these Catholic priests are the only ones who can do that.

I initially had problems with Fr. Merrin dying of a heart attack during the exorcism ritual, and Fr. Karras slamming the possessed Regan to the floor shouting for the devil to enter into him instead. I'm no expert in exorcisms but I'm sure it's a safe assumption to say that an exorcist demanding the possessing demon to leave the possessed and enter into themselves instread is probably among the top five things not to do when performing an exorcism. 

Still, despite their human frailty, God is victorious through these two imperfect priests in driving out the devil in His name as Jesus ordained them to do - St. Mark 16:17.
In the end, Fr. Karras maintains his faith through the repentance of his sins at the last few minutes of his life. And he fulfilled his duty to cast out the devil by the power of Christ. God's mercy is abundant to the very last second. 

"The Exorcist" isn't a movie I would consider required or recommended viewing for Catholics or Christians in general. Like I said, some of the scenes are very graphic and grotesque, shocking and uncomfortable to sit through. 

I'd say the same thing about Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." It's an impactful movie, but it's a movie I wouldn't recommend to everyone due to its graphic acts of violence. It's one thing to meditate on our Lord's suffering and passion. It's another thing to watch a realistic depiction of Jesus going through it, blood and all. Not everyone can sit through such an experience, nor do they need to.

Coming at the movie from a writing perspective, the depictions in "The Exorcist" serve an important part within the narrative. The devil is the prince of darkness and the father of lies. He's a disgusting entity. And I'm sure being in the same room with the devil manifesting himself would mentally scar anyone, even those close to God. This source of evil, disgusting and grotesque entity is possessing an innocent and charming young girl. So, obviously the devil is going to lash out at God and God's creature (i.e. Regan) by making her do disgusting and grotesque things. 

It's his feeble and weak way in mocking God by turning His creature, made in His image and likeness, to act like himself instead. It gives the audience all the more reason to want to see God victorious in this outcome. The movie can't depict just how evil the devil is without showing just how evil the devil is. 

Though there are several scenes that help accomplish this, one scene stands out. 

During Fr. Karras's evaluation of Regan in her bedroom where she's tied to the bed, he asks the possessing demon, "How long are you planning to stay in Regan?"

"Until she rots and lies stinking in the Earth." 

It's a line that well reflects how far demonic hatred for both Christ and mankind goes. 

The devil doesn't just plan on possessing Regan until she dies. He wants to stick around to watch her deceased body decompose and fall apart in her grave. Watching God's creations turn to dirt must be a thrill for the demonic.

There are some liberties taken in this movie. For instance, exorcists go through a period of preparation that normally involves prayer and penance before conducting an exorcism. And Fr. Karras expresses doubts about his faith after suffering the loss of his mother. He doesn't seem like he'd be fit to conduct an exorcism with his mental and spiritual state being what it is. 

But, again from a story-telling point of view, movies need room for character development. The two priests fight and expel the devil by the power of Christ. The devil doesn't go out calmly. His exit come with kicking and profanity on his part. And that's what happens here. The thanks to this exposure to the devil, Fr. Karras's faith is restored, albeit at the last minute. 

Like any Hollywood production, "The Exorcist" has its share of artistic liberties which is to be expected. After all, the primary purpose of most, if not all, movies is to entertain. Even movies meant to educate and inform still need to be entertaining above everything else, whether that movie is "The Passion of the Christ" or "Pee-Wee's Big Adventure." 

Blatty's novel, by the way, helps explain and clarify some of the scenes and situations in the movie that never made complete sense to me. For instance, I never understood what or to whom Regan was referring to during the scene when Chris is throwing a fancy party and Regan wanders down from her bedroom, stares at one of the party guests and says, "You're going to die up there." The scene is better explained in the novel. 

Regardless, the bottom line of the movie is that the devil, who is real, possesses a girl. Despite not having much, if any, religion whatsoever, still goes to that Catholic Church for help though she's not Catholic. And two Roman Catholic priests who believe in Jesus Christ, and stand in for Jesus Christ, use the power of Jesus Christ to conquer the devil in order to save a young girl. 

The story is just as much about Fr. Karras struggling to hang on to his faith and trust in God as it is about Regan MacNeil. 

Ultimately, this film is about regaining one's faith in God and how God can use the devil himself to lead souls back to Him. 

Again, the movie certainly isn't for every Catholic or anyone who calls themselves a Christian. It's a pro-Catholic movie the likes of which don't seem to come out in theaters much, if at all, these days. 

Whether you appreciate this movie or abhor it, one thing is unarguable. It has an amazing soundtrack. 

Not a Review Necessarily: Is the Exorcist Still the Scariest Movie Ever?

Linda Blair as Regan MacNeil in The Exorcist (1973).

I believe it's a safe assumption that movie audiences, whether horror fans or not, know to some degree that director William Friedkin's 1973 movie The Exorcist was and still is an impactful movie. That's putting it in simple terms, but it's true.
The movie is about a young girl named Regan MacNeil (Linda Blair) who's possessed by the devil. Her very non-religious mom (played by Ellen Burstyn) has no idea what is happening to her daughter. With all avenues of medical help exhausted, she finally turns to a Catholic priest for help.
The whole demonic possession motif is so common in the horror genre these days. By "demonic possession," I mean the idea that someone can somehow be taken over by evil spirits, and the remedy is the intervention of a priest or religious person to exorcise that malevolent spirit. I'm not referring to supernatural horror movies about haunted houses or possessed dolls, or the like.
Before 1973, there was no movie The Exorcist could really be compared to. It was a new kind of horror subject for the big screen - a subject as old as Christianity, and older. To see a Catholic exorcism reenacted was brand new and terrifying. But audiences get used anything the more they see it.
A lot of inspiration springs from this one movie.
After the release of The Exorcist, the theme was repeated in movies such as Abby (1974), Beyond the Door (1974), The Entity (1982), Burnt Offerings (1976), Prince of Darkness (1987) and of course the sequels to The Exorcist to name a few. 
The cultural impact of the movie is intense.
Though horror movies centered on exorcism and the demonic have lingered on through the 1970s, 1980s, and the 1990s, the 2005 movie The Exorcism of Emily Rose brought the horror sub-genre back into a more prominent place not seen since audiences watched Linda Blair be taken over by the devil.
What these two movies have in common is what makes them stand out above the rest. They're both based on true events.
The Exorcist is based on the Catholic exorcism of a 13-year old boy back in the 1940s outside Washington D.C.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is based on the Catholic exorcism of a German woman named Anneliese Michel back in the mid-1970s.
Both movies also have a documentary style about them, especially Emily Rose which focuses around a court case.
Friedkin comes from a documentary background. His previous film, The French Connection, has a similar feel to it. That's why author William Peter Blatty, whose book this movie is based on, picked him to film the movie.
That style adds to the frightening nature of each movie. It's an emphasis on the idea of "what if it really is true."
There's a ton of movies centering around possession and exorcisms released in the last 10 years alone - The Last Exorcism (2010), The Rite (2011), The Possession (2012), The Last Exorcism II (2013), Deliver Us From Evil (2014), The Exorcism of Molly Hartley (2015), The Possession Experiment (2016), The Crucifixion (2017), The Possession of Hannah Grace (2018), The Prodigy (2019) and more possession-based movies slated to come out in 2020. There's at least one for every year of the last decade! Demons are all the rage now.
To be honest, I find these kinds of movies repetitive and dull. They rely mostly on jump scares and grotesquaries to frighten audiences - contorted bodies, eyeballs rolled back into the head, scars and lesions, and a lot of vomit! Occasionally there's a good movie, but they don't hold a candle to both The Exorcist  and The Exorcism of Emily Rose. 
I first saw Friedkin's movie back in the mid-1990s when I was a teenager. I grew up in a Catholic household as my late father was a devout Roman Catholic. He attended the old rite of mass said in Latin every Sunday. He was never without a rosary in his pocket. And he owned quite a library of books on various religious topics including demonic possession.
I've read a few of these books on actual exorcism cases - Hostage to the Devil by Fr. Malachi Martin S.J., Begone Satan by Carl Vogl- an account of demonic possession involving a girl back in the 1920s in Erling, Iowa which lasted nearly a month - and An Exorcist Tells His Story by the Vatican's Chief Exorcist, Fr. Gabriele Amorth, to name a few. I found all these books to be very compelling. And of course there's accounts of possession and exorcism recorded in Scripture. So, being raised Catholic meant a belief that these things can and have happened.

And with that belief about exorcism, I was initially scared to watch The Exorcist. But that was me.
For others, it boils down to personal religious beliefs. Are demons real? Is there an eternal Hell where the souls of unrepentant sinners go? And can demons possess the living?
There's a lot to be said about the intense reactions audiences had when The Exorcist first came out. Some people vomited and passed out in theaters. Others ran out crying. Some non-Catholics ran straight to Catholic confessionals. What other horror/thriller movie had such an impact before 1973?
But audiences are used to seeing the sub-genre portrayed over and over again. For the most part, audiences have become desensitized to exorcism movies.
It's that documentary style in The Exorcist  that still holds up and helps set the movie apart from other such films. What also stands out is the focus within the movie of how the events surrounding Regan are effecting the two priests performing the exorcism makes the movie work. One of the priests is in the middle of a battle against doubt regarding his faith. The other priest is suffering from a heart condition. And now they both have to take on the devil himself.
It's not just a scary movie. There's a lot more to the story. There is so, so much for audiences to take away from The Exorcist.
Exorcism has effected real people beyond those who are supposedly possessed by demons. This movie addresses that, and that depiction is a scary thing in itself.
As Friedkin said in an interview, "It's not a movie about Dracula. It's not a film about the alien. It's a film about a real street in a real town, and upstairs on the third floor of this house is a real little girl who happens to possessed by a demon."
Meanwhile, other exorcism movies lean towards being monster movies. Despite my general dislike, there have been some good ones. Hereditary (2018) definitely pops into mind as a memorable and truly scary possession movie. But even that movie is more of a monster movie than The Exorcist. That's not necessarily a bad thing, though. Movies like that, and most other exorcism movies, are meant to scare the audience more than make them ponder the reality behind the phenomenon. The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose have a much more educational undertone than most other sub-genre films.
But perceptions have certainly shifted over time. Compared to recent horror films not necessarily centered on exorcism but with scary visuals and such, maybe The Exorcist is a product of its day. However,  with the reality of the movie, along with knowledge that many religions (Catholicism particularly) deal with problems like this in real life, other possession horror movies just don't compare story-wise.
Maybe for non-religious individuals, the movie may lack in scariness. I've heard one non-religious person claim the scary aspect for them was how the mother in the film, Chris MacNeil, who isn't religious at all in the movie, and thinks her daughter is literally loosing her mind, finally has to appeal to a Catholic priest out of desperation because no medical expert could tell her what's wrong with her daughter. She places her trust in an institution (the Catholic Church) which she is completely unfamiliar with. Otherwise, for religious folks (Christians especially) it still holds true that it's the scariest movie ever. Demons and the possibility (though rare) of possession is a very real part of Abrahamic religions.