The Exorcist (1973): Ellen Burstyn, Jason Miller, Max Von Sydow and Linda Blair. Directed by William Friedkin, Screenplay by William Peter Blatty, from his novel.
In 1950, a man appeared on Groucho Marx’s popular quiz show “You Bet Your Life”, claiming to be an Arab sheik who had so many wives, he’d lost count. Groucho was fascinated. A little ways into the pre-game interview, the man let the host know that it was a hoax, he’d been put up to it by a friend of Groucho’s to prove that he couldn’t spot a phony. Groucho asked the man’s name. “Billy Blatty” the man replied. They continued with the game and Blatty won $10,000. Groucho congratulated him and asked him what he was going to do with the money. Blatty said he was going to take some time off and write a novel.
That novel was “The Exorcist.”
Or so the story goes. Don’t believe everything you read about “The Exorcist”. I remember the hype when the film was first released in 1973. I was far too young to see the film, that most recommended should be rated X rather than R, but the TV commercials and radio spots and news reports of people fainting in the audience certainly made me want to see the film more than anything else. What I had to settle for was the Mad magazine satire, “The Ecchorcist” and initial stills that came out in the pages of “Famous Monsters of Filmland” (Warner Brothers originally held back promotional stills of “possessed Regan” to create a publicity stir).
The film, and William Peter Blatty’s book and screenplay, are reportedly based on an actual incident that happened in Cottage City, Maryland, and Bel-Nor, Missouri in 1948. There have been plenty of books written over the years if you want to find out the creepy details. I know I dove into everything I could find, including the original novels (and pseudo-sequel “Twinkle, Twinkle Killer Kane”) in my local used bookstore when I was a kid. Not only did I seriously risk nightmares, but I also risked spoiling eventually seeing “The Exorcist” by making up a movie in my head that was better than the real thing.
Couldn’t be further from the truth. Long before home video, “The Exorcist”, or at least a severely-edited version (supervised by director William Friedkin himself, who also provided alternate demon dialogue) showed up on network TV. Even in this pruned form I could see the great film that it was. When I did eventually see the film on home video, it was even better. In the first half of the film, Friedkin expertly pokes at everything that frightens us or makes us uncomfortable, from the alien landscape of an archaeological dig in Iraq (mostly wordless, and in that respect, strangely reminiscent of Kubrick’s opening to “2001: A Space Odyssey”, made equally strange by the rumor that Kubrick was originally offered “The Exorcist”) to Regan’s spinal tap, which I still find uncomfortable sitting through today.
Then he lets loose with the horror. Some critics have complained that there is a huge leap from the mysterious and mundane first half to the calm acceptance that there truly are supernatural forces at work in the second half of the film and I can see what they are getting at. Originally, Blatty’s intention with his (as yet unamed) novel was that you wouldn’t know what the answer was while you were reading. First you’d be led in the direction of Karl, the housekeeper’s husband, then psychological problems with Regan, all the way down the line, until all you were left with was the supernatural. Having done the mindwork on your own, you’d find yourself seriously considering God and the Devil. An ambitious plan for a novel, certainly. I’m not sure if it would have worked for the film though. I think Friedkin did what he could. He knew that he couldn’t keep the cat in the bag the way Hitchcock did, so he’d better make a damn good fright film at the very least.
It is entirely possible, with the way that it engages our intellect as much as our gag response, in a way that still holds up today, that “The Exorcist” may be the best horror film ever made.
Get it at Amazon:
The Exorcist (25th Anniversary Special Edition)
[No related posts]





This post is part of a series called "31 Days of Horror", thirty-one important horror films over the course of a month. Click 









Leave a Comment or Reply