2023-10-24 07:57:08
Talk about The Exorcist is to refer to the film that, along with The seed of the devil, brought the horror genre into the realm of auteur cinema and gave it a reputation that had been denied until then. The tape of William Friedkin, which turns 50 coinciding with the death of its creator, was a film that transmitted to 1973 viewers an existential fear that had not previously existed in cinema. Yes, it was a film that surprised with its special effects, but whose essence went beyond vomiting or spinning heads. It was an ancient fear that appealed to the viewer’s basic beliefs. The film transgressed many red lines that Hollywood had maintained until then. The fall of the censorship system allowed the film to spit onto the screen truly aggressive and irreverent images (what film today would dare to show a demonized 13-year-old girl violently masturbating with a crucifix?) or extremely scandalous dialogues. for right-thinking minds (“Tell Jesus to fuck you!”).
LEGACY
After the success of the film, the theaters were obviously filled with titles related to the devil, religion and exorcisms. Most of them cannibalizing the work of Friedkin, short of minimally interesting contributions. Not even the film’s own sequels have been up to the same level (although it never hurts to review and claim The Exorcist III). To commemorate the 50th anniversary, the director David Gordon Green wanted to repeat the formula of its Halloween trilogy, that is, to ignore the sequels and offer a direct sequel to the original film, although set in the present time.
HAVE YOU SEEN WHAT YOUR DAUGHTER’S PITCH HAS DONE?
Starting from the reality that, today, releasing a film with the characteristics of the The Exorcistwithin the mainstream Hollywood cinema and with a large budget is a chimera, we do not consider that David Gordon Green was the right filmmaker for this mission. Without denying him powers in terms of staging, his is a parasitic cinema of another’s style, without its own personality, and if The Exorcist was a success in 1973 was due in large part to the overwhelming personality of William Friedkin.
The Exorcist. Believer collides with political correctness and stops before it, something that Friedkin demolished 50 years ago. The film is more concerned with multiculturalism, with offering a message that is not offensive, with the terror not being aggressive, which drowns out everything that was essential in the original film. Yes, here we meet again with its two leading actresses, but fleetingly and without any weight in the plot. The presence of By Ellen Burstyn It is perfectly removable without affecting the main plot and the appearance of Linda Blair It turns out to be more of a cameo. Green takes some iconic moments from the original and recycles them in his film, but they turn out to be totally decaffeinated. Even some of the crudest elements of the film (the final climax) are watered down, without squeezing out its full potential.
THE POWER OF CHRIST COMPELS YOU!
If we do the exercise of separating this film from its predecessor, The Exorcist. Believer It turns out to be a nondescript, but correct, film of notable workmanship and that, within the subgenre of exorcisms, we can place above average (even within the sequels of the saga). It has good effects and David Gordon Green manages to introduce some suggestive and disturbing images. It is neither good, nor bad, nor quite the opposite. It is equidistant. The problem is that it is titled as it is titled and that it appeals to what it appeals to.
And The Exorcist it was Reagan tied to the bed spewing vomit and swearing; The Exorcist. Believer She is the girl already freed from any demonic spirit, perhaps with some degree of properly human evil, but harmless.
The CRITICAL entry | THE EXORCIST. BELIEVER. Sindió was first published in The entertainment web in the fantasy genre.
#CRITICISM #EXORCIST #BELIEVER #God