Directed by:
William FriedkinScreenplay:
William Peter BlattyCinematography:
Owen RoizmanComposer:
Jack NitzscheCast:
Ellen Burstyn, Linda Blair, Jason Miller, Max von Sydow, Lee J. Cobb, Kitty Winn, William O'Malley, Jack MacGowran, Barton Heyman, Peter Masterson (more)VOD (2)
Plots(1)
When a 12-year old girl is possessed by demons, a young priest takes it upon himself to selflessly save her at the behest of her famous movie-star mother. (official distributor synopsis)
Videos (2)
Reviews (13)
The Exorcist was obviously directed by someone who understood the film industry, the audience, and the market. At the time of filming, there was a peak of interest in the trendy satanic theme, and the audience was already accustomed to many things. One of the few remaining taboos was the connection of satanism with a child as a symbol of innocence. Within a short period, three genre films were created that successfully attempted this and gained cult film status. Alongside The Omen and Rosemary's Baby was The Exorcist. Shocked viewers held their breath as they watched the fragile girl transform into a vulgar monster full of anger. Unfortunately, for me, The Exorcist has always been a film where the prologue and the final scene work. What comes in between, which logically makes up the majority, goes over my head due to its excessive literalness. The prologue, which is unrelated to the rest of the story, is filled with sinister anticipation, tension, and a menacing premonition. Something is not right, but you still don't know where the blow will come from. In the final scene of the film, the camera focuses on the stairs in front of the house where someone had died shortly before. Through that shot, you feel an unspoken question - will the horror continue? The rest of the film plays with such open cards and is so descriptive that it simply becomes uninteresting to me. The director wants to emotionally manipulate me, but it doesn't work anymore because we don't live in the early 70s. For me, it still holds true that fear and tension are best evoked by what you cannot see and do not know. A film is the most powerful when it leaves you to wander in uncertainty. A film like The Exorcism of Emily Rose is much more attractive and impactful to me. Overall impression: 40%.
()
Superb film, flawless horror. There’s no need to praise the details, the rating speaks for itself (I actually don’t know what I would reproach). This film didn’t feel as old as it really is – time has left a deeper mark in much younger films – The Exorcist could meet even the stricter standards of today.
()
As a cult classic, The Exorcist may not have been one of the best horror films I've ever seen, but it still deserves recognition and attention. The truly frightening scenes could be counted on one hand, but the transformation of Regan and the special effects were terrifying in their own right. The beginning was a bit drawn out, incomprehensible to me at times, but later the plot began to build up to the very finale. In short, one of those films that over time has found its rightful place among the must-see films of a lifetime.
()
During the scene where Regan's bed is shaking, I felt a very chilling sensation in my stomach for the first time, which revealed how much I had been confused by what had thus far been a cautiously stepping chilling. Because a kind of tension comes, sneaking in through the back door, unseen and unheard by anyone, and once you let yourself be lightly enticed, it strikes fully. And when the vomiting or the escalated conclusion easily overcome all the tone deaf moments from the first half, it's a win. This girl deserves her place among the classics.
()
"I think I've lost my faith..." The book itself caused such a public commotion that Warner Bros snapped up the movie rights to it almost immediately. As well as the author, they chose a rising star in directing. William Friedkin. The Exorcist was everywhere in the press and on all people’s lips, mostly in a negative way. Which, as we know, is the best way of advertising. And the crowds just kept coming, the box office takings were huge. But for all the controversy, the bans, the movie theater operators’ arrests for unauthorized screenings, people fainting in the audience, moralist outrage and tales about the director terrorizing the crew at the time, they forgot about the movie as such and what it brought (not only) to the genre. The wide range of Academy nominations change nothing about that. Although in today’s world The Exorcist has aged in terms of shockingness, but it still works perfectly on the worrying basis of “what if". Chipping away at the certainty that nothing paranormal in our world exists. The five years younger, no less phenomenal Medusa Touch works with very similar “fears" of a direct encounter with the irrational. Or at least, that’s what I think... The best moments? Apart from the very well known ending, the muted dream sequence got to me most. But I was very disappointed by the absolute refusal to exploit the ingenious main musical theme. I simply can’t think why it was used so little in the movie. The Exorcist is proof that you need “just" three things for a good horror. A director with a skill for building up and gradually thickening the atmosphere, a good screenplay and, primarily, good actors. It’s a shame that such a conjunction occurs in this genre once in a blue moon. If you’re lucky. It’s good that The Exorcist at last received recognition from a filmmaking point of view. Both the movie and Friedkin certainly deserve it.
()
Ads