Review of The Exorcist (1973) by Marcd. — 26 Oct 2006
The original film never frightened me. What it did went much deeper. Friedkin's original film adaptation of the Blatty novel was a landmark in cinematic horror because it was constrained by the limitations of its medium.
Instead, it used them to provide the most while showing you as little as possible. Emotions like horror, and its close cousins suspense and tension, don't need to be created within the audience. They need to be brought to the surface.
This is why 'The Exorcist' remains compelling viewing after 33 years. The concepts and themes within the film isn't anything we haven't seen before. It's always been there. The fear works because the fear is real on a primal level which we can't truly explain.
We fear what we know. Subjecting the audience, the false sense of safety within that dark theatre is now revealed to be a silly misguided illusion. Friedkin knew this. As does fear. This version simply shows the same thing.
And it's scary. Not as much though. We see a little more than we should. Ultimately, the best horror told is the one which leaves more to the imagination of the audience. Give us more credit Hollywood.
Highbrow horror works.
This review of The Exorcist (1973) was written by Marcd. on 26 Oct 2006.
The Exorcist has generally received very positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
