What new devilry is this?
I watched The Exorcist this evening. Hailed by many as the scariest movie ever made, it has been on my "to-watch" list for many years; but I have avoided it out of fear that it would prove too disturbing for me. I have at last watched it (I rented the recent re-edit which contains some extra footage), and I am here to report that it is as disturbing as advertised. It is an extremely intense film, one that puts modern "horror" movies to shame; and like any good horror story ought, it gives you plenty to mull over after the final credits have rolled. Read on for some of my thoughts; I'll do my best to avoid spoilers.
The Exorcist is a horror story in the original, most intellectually satisfying sense: it sets out to disturb us, to take the familiar and make it frightening and alien. How do you create a terrifying story when the antagonist--in this case, the demon possessing the girl Regan--spends most of the movie strapped down and immobile? The Exorcist shows us how--it takes one of the most comfortable and reassuring images in the American cultural vocabulary--a cheerful, innocent child--and completely inverts it, making it a thing of horror. The effect is a powerful one, and this movie's sights and sounds linger in the mind long after we've forgotten Freddy Krueger's latest gory shenanigans. This movie shows us what sheer wrongness is--it's taking the good and pure and defiling it. Hearing sweet little Regan shrieking obscentities at her doctors is far more shocking than any special-effects-ridden Hollywood gorefest could hope to be.
The movie also makes a fascinating point about the nature of evil. The plot of the film revolves around the possession of a young girl by a demon. Halfway through the movie, the question occurs to us: why a little girl, of all things? Why doesn't the demon possess someone powerful, someone strong, someone in a position to do real damage to the unsuspecting people of the world? What is the point of possessing a little girl who remains bedridden through the entire movie? The answer, as the protagonists of the film slowly realize, is that the demon is possessing the girl because it can--because evil is not a super-powerful, world-conquering power, but a petty, hateful thing that delights in the destruction of beauty and hope. There is no point to the possession beyond the simple faith-killing despair that it brings into the lives of those who must watch innocent Regan deteriorate into inhumanity. I think this is another reason The Exorcist connects with us--it's a believable evil, the sort of evil that we confront and commit every day of our lives. It's petty, it's pointless, and it's mean-spirited; it's the mundane, everyday evils of gossip, slander, deceit, unfaithfulness, mockery that serve no high purpose beyond the perverse joy that comes with tearing someone down. If the demon in The Exorcist was a two-story-tall monster, it wouldn't be nearly so frightening, but this--this evil we know well.
It's a potent film, and a harrowing viewing to be sure. It's a frightening movie, but it demands our attention in ways most modern "horror" movies don't. It's beautiful and horrifying at the same time. Highly recommended.
Comments
When I saw her "walk" down the stairs like a spider I pretty much soiled myself.
Posted by: Ron | January 13, 2003 3:03 AM
Good review!
It's interesting to compare this movie to "Stigmata" (you can IMDB for it yourself). That movie portrayed the main character in some of the same ways as this one, but believe it or not, Patricia Arquette was possessed not by a demon, but by Jesus. Or, at least, by the wounds of the stigmata, which made her talk in an awfully devilish voice. Many of the same devices were taken to make a very different movie.
If you do want to see a good movie about the stigmata, find Paul Schrader's "Touch". My stars, I like that movie.
Posted by: joel | January 14, 2003 7:34 PM