the exorcist scared the holy crap jesus out of me.

my low panic tolerance for this film can probably be chalked up to the day long ago when i was an already somewhat paranoid eight year old and my gentle, god-fearing grandmother accidentally took me to see amityville horror. i was so traumatized by the whole experience that for several weeks i was afraid to go near my grandmother, sleep in the dark or even look very closely at our walls, which were undoubtedly oozing blood. my freaking-outedness can probably also be related to when i was marked for the devil by that woman during lunch the other day, but i'd rather not talk about it.

it's strange to see a good horror movie these days - i'm just not used to it. the last horror film that i can remember really wigging me out was probably the thing. weren't you terrified when wilford brimley went crazy?? even though the exorcist is a re release of a film more than 25 years old, it's still just plain damn scary. as i sat there, watching the screen and emitting an unexpected scream-gurgle noise from my throat every now and then, i contemplated my weak nerves. why was i so freaked out about this movie but was totally unaffected by the blair witch project? because blair witch sucked? maybe.

william friedkin, director of the exorcist, keeps pushing the idea that he has a lot of 'subliminal' satan faces interspersed at the beginning of this new theatrical release. it turns out that the frequency of these demons makes the effort a little less than subliminal and upgrades the attempt to 'blatantly obvious.' despite the propaganda, one particular face moment made the entire opening night audience gasp in unison and the next thing we all knew, we had been holding our breath for the entire duration of the film. when the closing credits finally shone themselves out at us, everyone in the theater exhaled and suddenly realized that our collective bladders were quite full.

i remember the time when i was young and my mother decided to have our new house blessed. there was a huge ceremony involved with priests and nuns and relatives walking from room to room, spilling holy water all over the place. it seemed to me at the time that this holy water thing really wasn't going to cut it when used against satan or other monsters of similar caliber, but my mother seemed satisfied. as far as i know, the devil never did made it over to our house. but who knows, maybe i'm possessed right now, even as i type. maybe all those lewd and dangerous thoughts really means that i'm evil incarnate.

cool.

on the other hand, if i really am evil incarnate, how could i be so easily freaked out by this movie? it's just your basic story about good versus evil, god versus the devil, teenagers versus adults. what makes the exorcist authentically creepy is that the character of father dyer (reverend william o'malley), who is introduced at a party playing the piano and talking about how he wants to be the main attraction at the all-singing, all-dancing powder-white cabaret that's undoubtedly found in heaven, is really an honest-to-god bona fide 100% catholic priest. not only does he play one on tv, but he really is one! there just seems to be something wrong with the idea of a priest breaking bread in mass one day and then starring in this movie about a puking, twelve-year old satan hellwhore the next. i believe there's a commandment against things like that, but i'd have to look it up.

all in all, i can't think of any one particular reason why this movie scares the holy jesus crap out of me. it could be the catholic upbringing, it could be the excellent sound design, it could even be the fumes from that tipped over porta-potty i had to park next to that evening, all i know is that i had to keep the lights on at night when i got home.

i'm much better now though.

really.

 

<9.26.00>

 

previous rant | newer rant | retro

all words (c) filmfatale industries 2000