Rating: 
Summary: The Exorcist was the scariest movie I have seen!
Review: When I first saw the Exorcist it was late at night and I was watching the last forty-five minutes, and I was convinced to buy
it the next day. As I watched it from the beginning, I got bored,but not for long. The flashes with that demon face was enough to give me nightmarish thoughts during daylight. Linda Blair did superb job as Regan, the girl posessed by the devil(or something close to it). The crawl down the stairs had me freaked. And I had seen the other two Exorcist movies before the original. I recommend this movie to anyone with a strong stomach, and doesn't scare easy.
Rating:
Summary: The Devil Inside
Review: The Exorcist was the first DVD I ever bought, and I was transfixed and became a collector for two reasons,
The crisp image of the new digital technology enhanced the picture and sound and with it the quality of watching the film and enjoying it much more as a result,
and secondly, having not watched the Exorcist for a long time, being banned in the UK until recently, I was again totally captivated by this original horror film that has aged very well.
Why is it still considered one the the sacriest films of all time??
simple
1-Friedkin is a very talented director, and was at the prime of his art when he did the Exorcist
2-The subject matter, dealing with the devil. It was one the the first films to tackle the supernatural in such a style, as opposed to vampires, draculas, zombies and giant tarantulas that was the staple diet of the horror genre.
Most crucially, using the innocence of a young girl, (played so well by Linda Blair, her first role and most important to date), as a platform for evil.
Though the gory scenes are outdated, and personally I find them the weakest part of the film, they do show this conflict between innocence and evil in one person.
The vile language and overt sexual overtones spoken by the devil through the child was the reason the film was banned in UK.
3-The music is an integral part of the mood of the film, and using Mike Oldfield's 'The Sentinel', added a lot to the scary atmosphere.
There are many disturbing scenes in the film,
the gradual possesion of Regan,Father Damien's spiritual conflict,and his dream scene!!!!! very disturbing!!
and the acting is all excellent, esp. Ellen Burstyn, Max Von Sydow, and the sadly recently departed, the late Jason Miller.
The DVD has very good extras, and though I have yet to watch the new version of the film, I still enjoy the Exorcist everytime I watch it, and am scared not by the gore..but by what's behind it all..The Devil Inside.
Rating:
Summary: if you believe in the devil than you got to see this.
Review: this movie was very scary when i was a kid. i remember the very first time it was on television i was afraid to go into my bedroom to see if she was in there. imagine seeing her in you're bed like the way it was in the movie. i would take a heart attack. but anyway it wasn't as good as sweet hostage but it was good.
Rating: 
Summary: Gave me nightmares for a month, but I loved it!
Review: I rented 'The Version You've Never Seen' a few weeks ago, and watched it during broad daylight! It still scared the hell out of me! Aside from a slow start, this movie is unbelievable; the fact that a film as old as this can still be so terrifying. I enjoyed the 'version never before seen' since it included scenes not found in the original theater version, like the notorious 'spider-walk' down the staircase!
While 'The Exorcist' is by no means for everyone(when she's doing *SOMETHING* with a crucifix, it can get a bit rough, to say the least!), it is an incredible film, sure to put the fear of God in you! Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: A great classic - maybe a bit too slow at the beginning...
Review: Two years after winning the Oscar as Best Director for "The French Connection", William Friedkin shoots William Peter Blatty's best-seller, "The Exorcist". The result is a good movie, one of the scariest ever made, but for me it's a bit overrated. There are some questions we can't do anything else but ask ourselves, even after several screenings.For instance we don't see any sign of possession of Regan's body before it's really possessed by this demon, Pazuzu. Blatty showed those signs in his book, those unjustified anger waves and crisis. But Friedkin has erased them in the movie, and he's even unable to suggest them, so we don't understand why SHE's finally possessed and not somebody else. Besides the film, on the contrary of the book, which is much faster and more precise, takes much time before really starting: Friedkin loses himself in many useless and boring sequences he should have erased for his last cut, for instance Father Karras (Jason Miller, who'd have deserved an Oscar for his brilliant performance) keeping walking up the stairs and walking and walking in the streets, - what's the real use of such plans? The film really starts - and we can wake up for good - after forty five or fifty minutes, when the doctor comes at the McNeil's house and sees Regan's body turned upside down by the demon, at last revealing his power and nastiness. And the suspense is terrific: Regan is now entirely possessed but Father Karras, despite Regan's incredible condition and language, despite that green and horrible puke she throws up to him, despite the evidence of the fact, despite the murders (carefully disguised), is unable to believe it, certain he's dealing with another nutcase. And when Father Merrin (Max von Sydow, astounding!), the Exorcist himself, arrives and proves that the evidence can't be discussed any more, the complete horror breaks out. Pazuzu's anger and powers and evil are at their paroxysm and Friedkin (and Blatty, who won an Oscar for his script based upon his novel - he also produced the movie by himself! Gosh!) give us some kind of opera filled with great violence, crude language, unpowerful religion and dark, cold supernatural (see the levitation scene). The atmosphere in Regan's bedroom is icy (see the cold smoke coming out from the mouths), and filled with the smell of death. Besides, finally, the power of the demon is too strong for the two priests. The Exorcist is killed first and Father Karras kills himself, throwing himself through the window, after forcing the Devil to take his body. Regan is now free, but... Linda Blair was only 12 when she played in this movie and her performance is amazing. Dick's Smith making-up work on her of course played a great role in her performance but she really did great. I've never seen such a young actress acting that good, playing an evil character with such conviction and realism. We also can see Ellen Burstyn in her best-known role, Jack McGowran ("The Fearless Vampire Killers") as Dennings, the eccentric movie director and Kitty Winn (awarded at 1971 Cannes Film Festival for "The Panic in Needle Park") as a young, wise servant, far away from the weird character imagined by Blatty in his novel. The sound, also 'Academy-Awarded' and Mike Oldfield's music are great, really fitting the rottening atmosphere. A bit too long, especially in the first hour, but it's very uneasy to make scarier now.
Rating:
Summary: A Favorite Of Mine
Review: Im 13 Now And I Saw This When I Was Ten.I Was Impressed.It Was My Kinda Movie.A Sick,Demented,Twisted Film.This Movie Didn't Scare Me,And I Didn't Expect It To.Ive Never Seen A Movie That Relly Frightened Me.The Fact That None Of It Is Real Stops That From Happening,But This Movie Could Easily Scare People.I Found Some Scenes A Bit Offensive Though,And The First Half Was Very Slow-Moving,But Other Than That It Was Great.
Rating:
Summary: WOW!!!
Review: At first I thought people were just saying that it was scary. Now I believe them! This was and is the scariest movie I've ever seen. Now I know there are some that will say this movie didn't scare them. Those people probably only had enough guts to watch the one on t.v. This movie terrified audiences before, and it will continue to. Then there are some people who have already made up there mind about it, they watched it just so they could give it a bad review. People there is nothing wrong with being scared! Turn off the lights, open the window a bit to let in a draft, leave hallways dark, leave doors (inside your house) open, the house has to be dead quiet so that it will work better and pop in this movie!
Rating: 
Summary: Peasoup?
Review: I've always found this unwatchable, really. One of the big films of that decade, it has two elements, one social realist and the other fantastical, neither complimentary in this case. The scene where Burnstyn begs the priest for help is powerful and I would have been up for a straight drama about his life. It would have meant zero bucks at the box office, but a clearer conscience for everyone. Instead, we get supernatural scenes that are camp and curiously uninvolving, even uninteresting despite the extremities. While I appreciate the theme of Christian sacrifice, I just don't think horror is Friedkin's forte - see 'The Guardian'. His hokey attempts to unsettle the audience with interjected glimpses of the demon betrays his lack of touch with this sort of material. For me, it is too silly.
I would swear Friedkin's voiceover was some sort of post modern joke if I had not been reliably informed by those in the know that Americans have no sense of irony. I also base this on the final conversation between the priest and the detective. Naively, I thought the film reference was a re-assuring nod to the audience and a sly reminder of what used to pass for cinema before more jaded palates prevailed. Friedkin offers a more pedestrian reason for it's inclusion. I think the sleaziest moment in his commentary is his obvious glee at Burnstyn's ascent up the stairs for the crucifix scene. He showed his true colours and the lack of integrity inherent in this sordid commercial enterprise. Surprisingly, for all the boorish, long winded banality of his personality, Bill is a sure hand with actors; although I can't see the point of the priest's conversation on the stairs superceding the original's silence, especially as he had given perfectly reasonable aesthetic reasons for it's exclusion in the first place. I'm being disingenuous, of course. Two versions mean more money. It's still dispiriting that an artist is so willing to disavow his judgement at the drop of a hat, or in this case, cheque book.
Max Von Sydow takes a well earned holiday from the existential bleakness of Bergman by getting vomited on by the devil. At least I thought it was the devil. The voice over tells me that it was in fact a demon which I'm unable to spell, offhand. Suffice to say, it is a cross between the act of urination and two trips to a place they keep animals.
A parting thought. Why is it that film characters always seem to have out of body experiences during dream sequences?
Rating:
Summary: The Thinking Man's Horror Film
Review: The Exorcist set the standard for terror when it was released in 1973. While quickly superceded by movies focused on special effects and gore, this film still challenges one's conceptions of good truimphant over evil. The debate which raged after publication of Blatty's book gained even greater force following the movie: Does good triumph in the end, or did the Devil win? I, for one, am fully in the latter camp, and cannot fathom how one could conceivably think the former (Baal, after all, does reveal to the priest that he will leave when the priest has "joined us", and not before, and that the demon's mission is to kill Father Marrin, both objectives which he accomplishes elegantly in the end...where is good's vicory?). Regardless of perspective, the movie still continues to provoke feelings of discomfort and terror, not the least since it is an "innocent" which is possessed in the first place. One initially starts off feeling empathy for Blair's character, then, when she begins tossing folks out of windows with their heads on backwards and entertaining herself with a crucifix, you emotionally abandon her mother to resolve the issue alone, the monstrosity of what is occurring too much to handle. It is, perhaps, the emotional response to what one is witnessing, the villification of what is an innocent in all respects, and one's acceptance of that innocent and helpless child as evil incarnate to all but, perhaps, Marrin, who is ultimately destroyed by "her", that makes the film so horrifying. The helplessness and impotence of the faith of both priests to exorcise evil, in the end, makes one question the power of faith in the light (darkness) of evil. Truly one of the first films to ever bring the concept of complete despair to modern horror. A definite must see...
Rating:
Summary: The Exorcist Not As Scary As You Have Been Lead To Believe!
Review: ... I just saw The Exorcist with my dad this week. I was very excited because I thought I was going to get the [feces] scared out of me, but I was very disappointed! But you have to admit, when she spinned her head around in a full circle that was awesome!!!!!!!!!! Even though I didnt get scared that much I still give it a ***** star rating! Mabey it is just because I ... do not understand it to the full.
|
