The Exorcist is far more than a horror movie. Even if it is emphasized that it is the originator of horror movies, created the paradigm of horror movies, and pioneered a generation, it greatly underestimates its value. It is a classic film rich in content and form. It has exotic flavors and a microcosm of the times. It shows the new achievements of science and technology, analyzes the inner struggles and transformations of characters, reflects social and family problems in the new era, focuses on the growth and development of young people, and has scientific Timeless topics related to religion, there are scenes within a movie, there are criminal detective cases, and there is even a good sense of humor. One of the most talked about points of the film is that it is "based on a real exorcism event", so the audience who watched it as a horror film became more and more convinced that the devil leaned over and guessed that "the bouncing bed board, the cold room, the 360 rotating Heads and volleys" may both be part of reality. But its truth lies far beyond this exorcism tale, in the offshoots rated as "procrastination", which no doubt were actually made up by "some screenwriter in France who was busy with his sex life." Bizarre renditions on stage often feel closer to reality than everyday life.
If you can carefully appreciate these overtones, you must admit that The Exorcist is a horror film through and through. It contains two levels of immediate fright and mental intimidation, and the form and content are perfectly unified. Slicing away the easily identifiable horror surfaces: makeup and sound effects, stripping out the sinister muscles: flash-cam montage cuts and metaphors (these techniques were so widely used in many subsequent films that they were commonplace), and finally straight to the core of horror: The sickness of society and the fate that human beings cannot escape due to their own defects.
Probably because I am not confused by my age, I have become more and more aware of the dark humor in horror movies these days. All the characters in this film reveal a convincing sense of absurdity: priests who have lost their faith, doctors who seek help from geniuses, popular actresses who can't understand the script but perform perfectly, and grow up and suffer but are infinitely well-behaved The little girl; even the demon itself, the demon protagonist who seems to have powerful lethality, is lamely covering up his lack of culture: "Latin is a compulsory course for ancient demons, but I only have English in my basket. What should I do?! I can only speak English upside down, with a pig-like roar to pretend to be a facade." Ah, I can't hate this kind of devil, it's not a foreigner who has come all the way, it's not The old comedian who has been dormant for thousands of years is the ABD (American born demon) who just fell to the ground. It is too young and ignorant, its power is simple and powerful because it has not been cultivated, holy water is useless to it, scriptures are useless to it, it is like Guo Jing, who is unable to understand the rhythm, and has carried Huang Yaoshi's blue sea tide. I have pity and awe for such demons. Its true form is the new anger and confusion of human beings in a rapidly changing society, and the contemporaries obviously know nothing about it. Just like the confusion the actress told the director in the film, "I support their demands, but I really can't understand, what does this have to do with this old building, why did they demolish it?!" He shouted: "I understand, I understand, I understand the connotation and source of your pain, but I just don't understand why you are presenting it in this form, lacking logic and hurting yourself and others..." But, in fact, if you really don't Understand this form, or you don't fully understand the kernel it contains.
The film was released in 1973 with 122 minutes of the original version and in 2010 with a 132-minute director's cut version (I watched both). In addition to adding some narrative bridges to make the story line clearer, the latter also has two complaints about the film industry, both in the same form: the detective invited the priest to watch the movie, and the priest was noncommittal after saying the title, After talking about the starring, the priest smiled and said, "Oh, I've seen it." You can imagine the director rolling on the ground and crying, "You don't understand, don't understand, don't understand". So cute.
Does such a mixed film review make you suspect that I am talking about the same movie? But the Exorcist is so rich, not only so rich, but so profound and neutral, transcending cultures and borders, to the eternal contradictions of humanity. So even though it's been nearly half a century since the film was released, the issues reflected in it still resonate strongly with me, a pragmatist who believes in agnosticism in a foreign land. (Is this a strong proof that the world is round, even if human beings run away for half a lifetime, they actually go back to the origin.)
Undoubtedly, I am over-interpreting it. Things that are intended to be offered to the public cannot escape the fate of being chewed on the tongue. The Exorcist deserves to be talked about, it's made so richly moderate and thorough that anyone of any age can cut a piece of it as their own argument. I'm happy to discuss all of this, and hopefully some of what I'm thinking about hasn't been written down yet.
View more about The Exorcist reviews
