by Jacob Puhr
The Exorcist is more than a movie. When it premiered in 1973 it became a cultural event, one that possessed the country in a ghoulish grasp. Interviews at the time featured responses not unlike the following, “It’s something I never saw in my whole entire life. It’s something different, and I went to a lot of movies but I’ve never seen anything like this myself.” The Exorcist would mark a pivotal time in cinematic history, one where what was considered acceptable changed; it’s no coincidence that gory slasher movies rose to prominence after The Exorcist’s release. The terrors and horrors packed into this film resulted in audience member’s fainting, hyperventilating, running out of the theater and some even had heart attacks. So what about this film evoked such fear never before felt in cinematic history and is truly the most horrific film ever made?
Many movie goers today can happily remark they’ve never fainted watching a movie in the theater. The idea of even running out of the theater is uncommon among most moviegoers. However, those who dared view The Exorcist experienced just the opposite. The film was so agonizing to watch that theaters kept smelling salts on hand as noted by The Film School Rejects. Andrew Klavan, an author (an avid ghost story lover) and commentator, noted on his show while attending the movie with his religious friend, the ladder hyperventilated and had to be brought out of the theater into a lobby of sick, crying audience members.
Critics at the time, such as Roger Ebert, deemed the film, “one of the best movies of its type ever made; it not only transcends the genre of terror, horror, and the supernatural, but it transcends such serious, ambitious efforts in the same direction.” He further explains we’re only faced with experiences in the film. We may as well be shot at with bullets of shock and injected with sickening nausea. It’s a merciless film, unrelenting in it’s pursuit of spreading terror through its trembling audience. Few movies can create such distressing emotions but The Exorcist elicits them all.
Few issues could damage a scary film more than goofy special effects. Say, for example, Regan, when possessed by the demon, looked like a fruit cake with ridiculous, plastered eyes. Absolutely no one would have taken the film seriously; many may have found it humorous instead. The Exorcist managed to be as scary as it was due to possessing a believability factor. That factor was its special effects which were impressively done without CGI. For example, the famed scene of Regan’s head slowly turning 180 degrees around her looked real. This moment in particular was so believable that it caused the first wave of audience members to flee the theater.
The film used advanced makeup techniques on Regan to make it appear as if her entire body and soul was being corrupted by the devil himself. Two behenates involved in the makeup department and special effects were Dick Smith and Linwood Dunn. Smith’s career spanned several of the greatest films ever produced such as The Godfather and Taxi Driver. His work on The Exorcist can’t be understated. One article masterfully characterized how his work made us “feel like co-conspirators in some of the most horrifying and mystifying shared illusions to be found on the silver screen.” His work brought the possessed Regan to life. Regan looked horrifying, as if evil was oozing out of her face, like a demon was itching to crawl out of her. He was known for combining special effects with makeup, which is how he brought to life the famous head spinning scene. Some would credit The Exorcist as being a turning point of special effects.
Linwood Dunn has an entire article from the Oscars detailing his work on The Exorcist. He was uncredited but heavily involved with the film. Dunn relied on mostly practical effects as did Smith to bring the possessed Regan to life. Imagine the shock an audience member felt watching a demon possessed girl levitate off her bed without a single wire showing. How was this possible? Imagine the disgust of seeing a thick, gooey ooze splatter from the mouth of a demon onto the face of a priest. Or, picture a priest’s face contorted into a wicked demon seamlessly before launching himself out a window. All of these scenes were horrifying on their own, but made real by the special effects created by Dunn.
But all of what I’ve told you is trivial. Special effects are only vessels for films to convey something deeper. See, nowadays, any movie could pull off what The Exorcist did, but the film would be incomplete, possibly disregarded entirely if made today. Many consider art to be a reflection of the times they were made in, so when a deeper look is given into the 1970’s culture, it’s obvious why the film was so horrific.
Back in the ‘70s, religion saw itself webbed with science and medicine; a theme of science v religion was heavily established in the film. In the ‘70s, the church was cited by one article as, “seemingly losing its control over American society and its soul, whilst simultaneously highlighting the prevalence of the psy-sciences in US popular discourse.” According to the church, the country was losing its moral ground and faith in them. Once more, an article by a British professor states the movie could be seen as a, “cultural moment that engaged with the social and cultural issues of the long 1960s – an era where Americans were questioning many of their central authorities and institutions.”
It wasn’t just the church and its priests that saw itself questioned, but authorities like doctors and scientists too. None of the higher, central authorities could prevent social dilemmas following the Watergate Scandal, Vietnam, or any of the widespread, cultural changes occurring in the ‘60s and ‘70s. In short, the film premiered during a turbulent time where the previously trusted authorities or institutions were no longer regarded as such.
The film itself operates between superstition and science. A simple explanation of the plot can reflect the conflicting ideas of which institution to trust. Scientists and doctors are unable to account for Regan’s increasingly strange and horrifying behavior. Their explanations fail and Regan comes closer and closer to becoming an entity of evil until the reluctant priest character, Damien Karras, performs an exorcist with Father Merrin. Both perish, but Regan is relieved of the evil demon possessing her. The church, which many have lost faith in, succeeded where modern science failed. The Exorcist is clearly bringing up tough, perhaps unanswerable questions of what institution to hold faithful to. The church itself was reluctant to do what was necessary to save Regan while the doctors offered ineffective, useless solutions to save her. When a confused and turbulent America viewed this film, surely those questions struck deep within them. Could any of those institutions be trusted?
As stated previously, The Exorcist depicted material that was never before accepted in film. Regan, a puberty aged girl, would even murder a grown man in a brutal fashion, excessively cuss at priests and her mother and desecrate on the floor just to name a few. The corruption of children is a main factor in why the film was scary. Children are the future of the world. By portraying them as possessed by wicked demons a blunt message is brought forward: the future is in jeopardy.
In a simple recap, it can be largely accepted that The Exorcist played into fears about institutions, the place of the church and the country’s future which appalled a disillusioned America. It was these fears which were enacted in The Exorcist, which made, “reports in the popular press of demon possessions, audience members convulsing and vomiting at screenings, and apparent religious and specifically Catholic moral outrage.” frighteningly widespread.