Land of Whimsy

Movies watched in May 2006

Land of Whimsy / Movies / Movies watched in May 2006

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

(*) The Powerpuff Girls Movie ***

USA: Craig McCracken, 2002

IMDB reference

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

(*) The Exorcist ****

USA: William Friedkin, 1973

I recently lent some DVDs to my amigo Baron Scarpia, and he did likewise with me. You can read his in-depth review of What Have You Done to Solange? here, and today, I am going to attempt a rather less in-depth analysis of The Exorcist.

A bit of personal history first: I first saw The Exorcist during its first broadcast on British television in 2001 after being banned by the British Nanny State Board of Film Censors for over 25 years, and, in all honesty, I wasn't particularly won over by it. I found it rather plodding, and, if I remember correctly, by the time the big exorcism scene came at the end, Lyris and myself indulged in some less than good-natured heckling. In mid-2003, I bought the "Version You've Never Seen Release" (it was my 100th DVD), partly wondering if the re-insterted elements would cause me to look upon the film more favourably. To cut a long story short, they didn't, and I ended up selling the thing on eBay shortly afterwards.

Recently, though, I decided to give the film one last go. After all, many people consider it the greatest horror movie of all time (that's right, horror movie, not "supernatural thriller" as some people who are scared of the word "horror" have taken to calling it), so I decided that I must have been missing something. In any event, while I initially assumed that the film's lack of effect on me was due to my lack of belief in the mythology espoused by the film, that doesn't explain why the similarly themed The Omen is one of my favourite films, or why I can watch The Lord of the Rings despite not believing in elves and goblins. In any event, third time's a charm, as they say.

And do you know what? Watching it for the third time round, I was much more impressed by it. Watching it alone in the darkness of my bedroom in the middle of the night, with headphones on, staring at my tiny, grotty little LCD monitor, I found it much more effective than on my previous two viewings. No, I didn't find it remotely scary, but that's no big deal as I never find films scary anyway. But this time round I found myself appreciating it much more on a thematic level. The juxtaposition of medical and supernatural solutions is intriguing, and I love the irony of the medical men giving up and recommending spiritual intervention while the priest, Father Karras, instead initially advocates the medical route. Additionally, the first half of the film, which I originally found boring, struck me as working much better this time round, particularly with regard to what we don't see. (For example, when Chris mentions that Regan has "changed", this comes as news to us as we haven't seen any evidence of it yet. I also noticed the distinct lack of dwelling on Father Karras' mother's death: it's mentioned in passing by another character some time later, which I can only assume is to underline the fact that he wasn't there for her.) Oh, and I love the theme music - much better than Halloween, if you ask me.

Still, I can't deny that there are stil some elements of the film that don't sit well with me. The effect of the possession on Regan is so overdone as to be comedic - the old "less is more" is constantly espoused in discussions of horror films, but for some reason this doesn't seem to apply to The Exorcist. In a film like Suspiria, overblown gloop and gore is thematically appropriate given the film's supernatural, fairytale-like setting, but in The Exorcist, which attempts to ground itself in reality, the image of a young girl speaking with the overdubbed voice of an older man while vomiting pea soup and twisting her head 180 degrees somehow doesn't ring true. I appreciate what director William Friedkin may have been going for, though.

The message of the film seems to be that science is all very well, but faith is ultimately what is needed. Well, sorry, but that doesn't work for me. Like I said before, I can appreciate what the filmmakers are trying to do, but it's a little hard to buy into a movie whose entire system of belief is so diametrically opposed to my own. Then again, perhaps I'm missing the point. I was rather surprised to learn, recently, that Friedkin is in fact agnostic - something you probably wouldn't have thought given his video introduction at the start of the film.

So, The Exorcist: better than I originally thought, but I'm still far from ready to proclaim it a classic and sing its praises from the rooftops.

IMDB reference