the GIRLS REACT to *The Exorcist (1973)* THIS IS TRAUMATIZING!! (First Time Watching) Horror Movies
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 май 2023
- NEW MERCH: white-noise-store.creator-spr...
Links: direct.me/whitenoisereacts
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in the videos that you are seeing are those of the artist(s) featured and do not necessarily reflect the views of the channel, contributors, site editors, affiliates, sponsors or advertisers.
Stella's Insta: / stellaa_rrose
The girls, Hayley and Stella, are reacting to The Exorcist and this film is horrifying!! Enjoy this first time watching horror movies and the exorcist!
#firsttimereaction #moviereaction #firsttimewatching #horrorstory #horrormovies #theexorcist #lindablair #demon #spirits #girls #girlsreacting
Merch Store:
teespring.com/stores/white-no...
For exclusive content, early access and much more...
Patreon: www.patreon.com/whitenoiserea...
For business or collaborations email:
peeweecinemasbusiness@gmail.com
For sponsorships: whitenoisereacts@thestation.io
Hero Patrons:
Stella
Brad
Alexander Berry
Sarah Shetland
Isabella Horn
Emily
Darkaddict19
Immanuel mcfarlane
Jake A
Sckye Hansen
Hyb3rGamimg
Sharon
Black Flame
Denisa Čižmářová
Jade Fairman
Khadijah Sims
Osher Ratzabi
Seth
Dario Tamadon
elizabeth
Sofie Hansen
Tann Honey
Giuseppe DeGaetano
Adam Armstrong
Noah Moore
Alex FairysnailTails
JM1K13
iminhighschool
Josip Buretic
Rebecca McGowan
Thomas Jones
Tommy Ross
Talia Herron
RegalLatin2303
CD85
Zennor Whyte
Anthony Velasquez
Carlos Hernandez
Lauryn Shealy
Gabby B
Kinglier
004
Josh Dixon
Tracy Parr
Iyana Taylor
Jayie
Megan Arnett
luccabeast
DABSLABOG
Elijah Yang
Destiny O
Jonathan
Leah
Angel Groves
HisGreatness86
Avatar Ashdel
BlueDebut
Michael Rutter
Michael Diego Gabriel
Crystal
Marcus Russell
Highseas
Dmaru Hill
It’s Angie
Just Michelle
FrickingKaos
Curtis Miller
Kiran
Artverse
ThunderBeast
christina kunnumpurath
grantingallday
Carlos
Rochelle Gardner
Jessica taylor
Donald “Chronos” King
Abigail Nelson
Patrick Jackson
Megan Bell
Guin12
Anissa Allié
Sarah
Joshua Heaysman
Sandell Lentz
Sheldon
Daniel Fuchs
pusha .
SimianSupreme
Danyelle
GraysonTodd
Priscila
Everett (PixelMight) Baker
beautiful bliss
Sarah 9
Chantel W
Anthony Allan
Rob Williams
UltimateHope101
Dėborah Aribo
Kathryn Fike
Joseph E.W.
Chicken Ala Queen
Jennifer Perez
Nahfiscared
Maria Oncoy
Gecko Dmitrievich-Shcherbatskaya
Belzeref
Ricky Flores
Arake
leyla
Dale
Justin Feldman
Anna Roth
Ellie H
Sha Jackson
Susana Canales
Michelle Cook
iisublime
Lauren
Maria Harrington
Makayla Araujo
Brendizzzzle
Elizabeth Olivero
Valeria Loera
Chloe Winterbottom
DarthDecimus24
Dominik Klar
Nola Scott
Cadence Beisigl
Reuben Filimaua
Meghna
Andrew langton
Quietjbc
Dylan H
Kaitlyn
Alicia Hauskins
Cat Hack
maemisfitz
Ashley ‘LJ’ Peters
Kat Bland
Dorian Gipson
Nicole111
goonghana .
Andrea Mason
Senko
Kadin Osceola
Dannica Horsman
Angelie Romo
Pritha Hajra
Samantha Reandeau
Kelly
Teddy O'Hea
Kara Rohlman
J Michael Bell
Gavin Furukawa
SongBird177
Kora Orion
ripeka manawatu
Kygro
Raymundo Bustos
Kevin J. Coleman
Deseray Stoner
Glorie
Don Hart
Choux D Bruxelles
Anime empress
Seirsan
Tamija
Jess Bracero
Anastasiia
Katie Langton
Emag
Rhodessa Gonzales
Cedrick Desjardins
Justine
Shannon Warkentin
Morgan Tinkey
Fai
Elin
Shelly Do
1985anj
Elisa Luna
Noternie
pattinaggiojo
Kassie Hustrulid
Klara
Ashlei Morrell
Annie519
Katie
lorenajocelyne
breanna
Allora TV
Raven Dark
Demetria Conley
florence
Jenny V
Tim Möbius
Alice
Melanie
WastedPo
Avery
Kat Garrett
GO.
Amber Burton
Sarah Mosinski
Chelsea Keel
Alfred Höttl
Robert Hinojosa
Haley
LM_252
Jenny M
Vol
Ronja Greger
Haunt
Terrie Vasquez
Sophia Jackson
Taylor Fortenberry
Nneka Bonner
Its Morbin' Time
Melanie
Darth Dolak
Rebecca Piper
Xalia
Rose Ogden
Andrew Hansen
Fritz (Sarah B)
Ashly Heilmann
Ashley Stephenson
Sulema
titus
Raindog
Haley Hastings
Nerd Going Outside
Meredith
Isabella Hayes-Hollands
Raikiri29
Skylight106
Jessica Gorder
Ruth
Emily
Jessica Heebner
Lidia Dias
Shannon Roux
Mariah Greuel
Tom Ekstrand
Alejandra Díaz
Ryan Moore
Madelyn Lafferty
Nicole Ogunbodede
Darius
Taylor
jonathan Edge
Mona7
FOTSnax
Ann
elishia monaghan
Angeldanger145
Michael Therrien
Anne
Ramona
Coco
Kristin Carter 
Развлечения
Where were you when you first saw this movie??
I first saw this movie at my uncles house year 1998 around 12yrs old.. After that got sick nearly 3 days especially the climax scenes and the demon flashing face scared the hell out of me. Still now in my 30s i did not buy the blue ray uncut version eventhough i am a horror fan with lots of blueray flims at home
i was 12 years old and watched it with my mom at home. I was scared for months.
I first watched it after a birthday party. Awesome channel!!!
@@carmenhiatt7206 which year🤔
I saw it late ‘80s. I was hooked on horror movies. My mom took me to the video rental place and said I can watch whatever dumb horror movies I want.
Good ole 80s latchkey kid at its best. 😈
It's funny how after 50 years we have seen hundreds of movies about little girls being posessed and somehow this one still hits differently... The absence of soundtrack, the raw practical effects, the subtle cuts between scenes and of course a great cast can make a simple story become one of the greatest movies ever made and a reference to an entire genre that still try to repeat the same formula over and over and sumetimes unsuccessfully.
This movie is eternal, and so are Linda Blair, Ellen Burstyn and Max Von Sidow (RIP). Can't wait to see what the reboot is going to be like.
This movie has many differences that make it stand out from all the others. The others follow a formula that movie goers today expect: jump scares, background music, average cast, but the Exorcist, thanks to Billy Friedkin's 'documentary style' of directing created an unsettling feeling of realism.
Does reboot mean remake???
Are they going to remake this one???
Ohhh Jesus Lord, THAT will be very interesting to see 😊
@@jimmykarlsson2567 No it does not mean remake
@@jimmykarlsson2567 No, reboot means they're re-launching/re-starting the franchise. Like Evil Dead (1981) and Evil Dead (2013). Now whether they want to go about it by remaking the OG or take a risk and do a new standalone story that leaves room for sequels is up to them.
@@thatfilmydesaikid oki, thank you for clearing that out for me 😀.
It maybe would be interesting if they reboot this movie, i say maybe, because some movies you don't wanna touch out of respect
The Exorcist isn't just a great horror movie, it's one of the greatest films of all time
So much more than a horror movie.
YES
Yeah absolutely, it has been considered by many movie critics as among the best movie of all time
These two keep comparing this flick to "modern" horror films. Well, THIS one is pretty much the FATHER of what we now call the "modern" kind. THIS one CHANGED how horror movies were made and all these more RECENT ones pretty much stem from IT's influence
@@Sheol-uk3bu Of course they're going to compare it to what they know, it's human nature. Do you want them to not make any observations and cite no references? Then why are you even watching a reaction video, just to hear lavish praise be heaped upon your favourite movie?
The fear hits you later - when you're alone and its quiet, and you start thinking about it - at least that's how it hit me, and that's why I have this as the scariest movie Ive ever seen. Oh especially when you know it was based on a true story - that helps make it scary as hell.
It's not a jump scare type of horror it's seeps into your subconscious it lingers on the mind.
The book is only vaguely inspired by 1949 Cottage City exorcism and 1634 Loudun exorcism. Calling that as based on a true story is major misinformation. It's as, if saying that Witches is based on true story of Salem Witch trials or something.
There was an event, most information we have comes from press and some witness testimonies. The last living witness hasn't really believed that it was demonic. And the neighbours and kids friends said the kid was a total trickster constantly scaring his own mother.
But other than that a lot of this things have been sensationalised and pushed to the extremes for Hollywood sakes.
Mental health is a serious topic and mental illnesses are very scary as much as they are real. But most exorcism related movies aren't really accurate or based on actual properly recreated events.
Kid was restrained and have been under exorcism. Knowing what American priests were up to in that era, that isn't a suprising thing to do, not when exorcisms can easily turn into abuse of the possessed. Some bed shaking and moving items were observed. Which could be easily explained by kid trashing around and people not paying attention and over exaggerating stuff. Including people probably adding extra stuff over the years.
They had one major exorcism really. It ended in the kid totally getting bored with all the attention and living normal life afterwards. Considering his favourite aunt was a major spiritualist that taught him playing with Ouja Boards - my bet is that he felt compelled to have some fun in her honour after she died. Maybe didn't want to go to school or liked the attention. But then it all went all out of the hand.
Oh also nothing was properly ever documented and was just hearsay.
Maybe it would help to know it was based VERY LOOSELY on a true story about a boy with mental problems. There was no demon, no levitation, no throwing up of green goo, and nobody died.
Yeah I hear you. And you suddenly find out that you slept with the lights on for almost 2 weeks 🥶🥶🥶.
And i Believe in these things with the supernatural, it makes it MUCH scarier, because you sitting by yourself and wonder " is she coming for me next " 😱😱😱.
I was about 13 when I saw this the first time...... totally blown away of pure fear
@@stephenpmurphy591 no they didn't even know what jumpscares was back then.
It's more psychological fear of the whole atmosphere, the bizarre things
The priest who was Damian Karass's friend was an actual priest. Karras sacrificed himself in order to save Reagan from the demon. He who lays down the life for his friend.
There is a VERY strong Christian theme in this movie, which most people don't see, because it seems like evil is losing. But it isn't. And the reason is because of Father Kerras' charactor arc.
In the begining, his faith is worn down to the point of cynacism. He won't even throw a few coins to the homeless man, because he knows he doesnt want lifechanging help.
At the end of the film, he sacrifices himself, for a little girl he doesn't even know.
I think its an arc we play out in real life, all the time.
From a religious perspective, while Karras did technically commit suicide, it was also self-sacrifice to prevent the demon from further harming Reagan, as it was reaching for her before Karras retook control. Between that and the final rites the other priest gave him while he was dying, he would not have gone to Hell. An exorcism did technically occur, despite how messy the end result was.
He committed suicide in the same way a soldier who throws himself on a grenade commits suicide. More a self-sacrifice than what people think of when they hear the term suicide.
Y'all haven't seen the second one?
Re: Karras's sacrifice... "Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one's life for one's friends". -John 15:13 NIV
The fact that these were all practical effects, before CGI, always blows my mind. 🖤
LONGGGGGG before CGI...
None of them especially mindblowing practical effects though, just well done makeup and prosthetics. Not in the American werewolf in London league.
@@aaronbarlow4376 that was 8 years after exorcist. Both good tho.
@@aaronbarlow4376 You should watch the documentary. They had to refrigerate the set and only had hours to film before the lights warmed it up again. It was experimental, things learned in the production process by the special effects crew would benefit future productions, like American Werewolf in London. I love that movie too.
I'd argue that they were absolutely mind-blowing. Ask Rick Baker who the best was; Dick Smith. Smith taught Baker everything he knew. Baker expanded on that, of course. Look at Smith's work in Ghost Story around the same time as Werewolf. It's extraordinary.@@aaronbarlow4376
To answer the question about the scene where Regan is being hypnotized. I see a lot of people ask why she is holding her right arm up during the hypnosis session. If you remember, the statue of Pazuzu is making the exact same pose with his right hand up in the Iraq and exorcism scene. Great movie, book and reaction!
I also thought that the pose resembles a cobra ready to attack someone, and that's what Regan did, she attacked the shrimp.
I see the Pazuzu explanation everywhere which is interesting. As someone who has undergone hypnotherapy due to PTSD, when my therapist counts me into the hypnotic state, my arm starts going up. As long as it's up, she knows that I'm still under. As she counts me out, my hand starts going down. And, before anyone asks, yes I can remember everything that happens.
In the original novel, Father Merrin had exorcised the ancient demon Pazuzu from an unspecified person in Africa years before, and it’s the same one possessing Regan. The statue at the beginning is of Pazuzu, which was the first time Merrin saw the actual form of the enemy he defefeated. There really is only one sequel. Exorcist III: Legion was written and directed by William Peter Blatty, the author of The Exorcist novel. It’s set fifteen years after the events in this story. It’s more of a detective supernatural thriller.
And yet another great performance by Brad Dourif, who elevates every movie he's in.
I finally watched Legion 2 weeks ago, it's worthy of being the real sequel
I had forgotten the backstory of father merrin, so thanks!!
All of that is in the movie too.
The true sequel to this movie is Repossessed from 1990 with Linda Blair and Leslie Neilson.
At the age of 20, I saw the movie in 1973 when it first came out FIFTY YEARS AGO. It was the first serious horror movie ever made - with great writing, acting, directing, and cinematography. It was the first time we saw sexually tinged graphic scenes like Regan grabbing the shrink's crotch and the crucifix scene. The shock intensified the fright factor for us 1973 audiences. The characters reacted to the situations the way they would in real life. That made it seem more real and more frightening. The only way to see it was in a darkened movie theater. Watching the movie in silence instead of thinking about what to say in a reaction video also made the movie much scarier. All these things combined made it the scariest movie for us 1973 audiences OF ALL TIME, by a mile.,
Wait you're in your 70s???..... I i i.... How did you type all this?
@@dontrelldurant3450 Dontrell: How did I type all this? How did you come up with such an irrelevant and stupid question? F-OFF.
@@dontrelldurant3450 Don't be an asshole
Ur in ur 70s and you typed all that?
@@Astrogamezz no no no no.... They're in their 90s.
Rosemary's Baby and The Haunting (1962) are two other classic horror films that build on suspense and mental health/paranoia issues. No gore or violence but two of the most unnerving films to enjoy.
Haunting was 1963
45:25 the cruelty happened, yes, but the demon didn't get damien's soul. the movie made a point to show him getting his last rites, which is a deathbed confession that absolves you of your past sins. i think that's the part that's the "triumph" of good over evil. it's a very bittersweet ending
@@thegamingcook785 He also gave his life for a girl he never met.
@@thegamingcook785 I know that.
Karras never met her
Also, part of Damien's arc is that he starts out having lost his faith. He's looking to leave the job because, as he says at the beginning, it's the wrong fit now. He feels like a fraud ministering to people and representing the church, God, etc. when he doesn't even really believe anymore. But when he sees things beyond ordinary explanation, sees the demon in action, he sees that it's all real after all. And, with the understanding that there really is a larger battle happening, he finds himself in a critical moment where a little girl is suffering, her loved ones are falling into despair, the expert brought in to help has been killed, and he's obviously in well above his head. In that moment, the man who was ready to walk away from the church because he no longer believed chooses instead to sacrifice himself to save the girl. For Karras's part, I assume this decision is just "doing the right thing." For the director and/or writer, I would imagine this is an intentional echo of the idea of Jesus sacrificing himself to save the innocent. Either way, it completes Damien's "lost faith->faith regained" arc.
There are multiple moments in the story that lead Damien through his arc (the backwards English, the writing on the stomach) but you see the real, final turning point in Damien in two separate places: (1) When he sees the bed floating and Merrin has to keep asking him to say the response. This is when he's finally beyond all doubt and realizing, holy f, this battle between good and evil is all real; and the real pivot, (2) when he's sitting downstairs and Chris asks him if her daughter is going to die. You see him get pulled out of his head at that moment, he tells her "no" in no uncertain terms, and gets up to rejoin the battle. At that moment, he stops wallowing in his own misery and confusion and determines that he's NOT going to let the demon destroy this little girl.
Considering that the actor who played Damien was not really an actor who did much of anything else, the subtlety with which he played those moments is stunning. It never felt like an actor going on a "face journey," it just felt like real moments in a real person. Honestly, brilliant.
The impact of this film can not be overstated. It defined the satanic subgenre of horror films up until this very day, and its slow burn, realistic tone, and well-developed characters give it tremendous power.
Great reaction!
The great thing about The Exorcist is that there are no 'classic' jump scares. It keeps ratcheting up the suspense but never resolves it, even the scary scenes end a little bit early so there's no point where you get to let your guard down and relax. It's a perfect example of how to edit and pace a horror film.
agree - a classic made when audiences were challenged to use their brains (somewhat of a lost art with horror films) i'm still impressed with the top-notch acting from Jason Miller and his doubts with his faith to Ellen Burstyn and her frustration with the medical profession. hate to use the old cliche but 'they don't make them like this anymore'
There are a couple of jump scares. The flaring candle paired with the big noise of Karl entering the attic, for one. That's about as classic a jump scare as you can get. There was another one I noticed later in the movie as well, though I'm blanking on what it is atm (it's late here, y'all). You're right, though, that most of the movie is a much slower burn, like "The Shining" and other movies from that era of "auteur cinema." That being said, let's not let our nostalgia bubbles blind us to the fact that there were plenty of garbage movies back in the day as well, just as there are many good movies today (some of which also feature that slow burn; they're just usually not horror movies). The difference in pacing has more to do with the pace of the world changing since 50 years ago, which isn't specific to our era. I mean, I still remember trying to teach my mom how to use a computer mouse back in the day and, even now, she struggles with taking in multiple streams of info from a screen or game HUD while you've got toddlers who are taking to the pace of the new world naturally and easily. Different is just different, it doesn't necessarily mean "worse."
Mostly what people *actually* miss about "the old days" is that they were young then. They then confuse this with things in the past being "better." Every generation does it. Your grandparents' generation thought the things you loved the most as a teen and twenty-something were garbage too. Let's not get it twisted.
As a screenwriter, a rule is to come into a scene late and leave early. Another, is to kill off your darlings (characters) like when Hitchcock killed Mariam in Psycho, the main character up to that point.
@@johnplaysgames3120 The other one is when the phone rings while Damien is listening to the tape of the demon speaking English in reverse.
This movie is based on the novel The Exorcit written by William Peter Blatty. Blatty heard of a true case of a 14 year old Maryland boy who was possessed.
I was taught by a nun-friend of his at MdeS and she said the only thing that scared her was a ouiji board. I’m now an atheist but I’m still terrified of ouiji boards to this day
@@opalviking The ironic thing is that ouija boards were not supposed to be anything supernatural... It was simply a board game when it first came out.
It wasn't a true case of a kid being possessed. Its based on a hearsay of a case of kid pranking his own mother, to the point where she decided to ask for exorcisms. There is no evidence, neighbours and witnesses attested the kid was a menace.
What actually happened was a messy kid having a tantrum, having fun of his mother.
No supernatural possessions involved.
A shaking bed from kid throwing a tantrum, calling people names, repeating random Latin words thrown at him by priests, kid being caught scratching words on his body?
And no actual documentation of the case or any proof aside hearsay. And multiple people adding and taking from the story as they pleased. Nah.
@@opalviking A Ouiji board is a piece of varnished cardboard mass-produced in a factory. Try playing with one with a bunch of non-believers. Nothing happens. As for the "true" story, well it may have been true that there was a story, but it was, like all alleged possession cases, a case involving mental illness and not anything supernatural...all the memorable bits from the film were totally invented.
@@Corn_Pone_Flicks you sound like you’re really fun at parties
William Friedkin is the director; he's made multiple classic films, and is known for his documentary style approach to film.
Thank you for acknowledging that there has to be context when watching older horror films.
Friedkin won the Best Director Oscar for his movie before this one, The French Connection. He also was nominated again for this one, and it was the first horror movie ever nominated for Best Picture. That was a feat; the stigma against horror movies was intense.
This film is a perfect example of films that get better with repeat viewings because there's so much to digest once you know what you're watching and looking for, it's so intricately woven. And you gotta remember it's also gonna hit differently depending on your upbringing, when you first saw it, and one's religious beliefs. I saw this at 9 years old, only a couple years after receiving my first communion. To a kid who still believed in God and possession at that time, this was as real at it gets vs a couple 20 somethings who have seen the genre tropes created by this film recycled in other films. It's a very different experience. But I promise you it's a film worth diving deeper into.
Wow. You shouldn’t have seen this film at aged 9, poor thing. I saw it at 15 (snuck in as it was an 18 certificate). I was totally freaked out, along with everyone else in the cinema! 😱
Fun fact it wasnt the scares that made people pass out and or leave the theater when this came out, it was the medical scenes involving a child that made people highly uncomfortable
I think you were actually on the right track. Other reviewers have said they thought that Pasuzu's target was actually Fr. Karras, who won in the end by his action. Also it is interesting to note that both priests went through all this, and ended up giving their lives, for a little girl whose normal side they never saw.
Ive always thought that Merrin was the prime target of Pizuzu seeing that Merrin beat him before with the boy in Africa. Karras was a bonus.
@@bobby_c7671 I believe it's the opposite. The demon wants to break Karras, who's already on the brink. He just wants Merrin as a witness to rub it in his face, a petty act of vengeance.
@@bobby_c7671 I agree, Merrin was the prime target. Karras wasn't an exorcist nor he believed in it. And there was no reason for Karras to be involved in this, it was merely coincidence. No, Pasuzu wanted Merrin.
@@captainspaulding1969 In the book, Merrin was the target. When Merrin dies of a heart attack, the demon is PISSED, mostly because the man died before the demon was able to "break" him. He's shouting and cursing at the corpse, enraged that a heart condition will rob him of his victory, then demands that Karras do something to revive Merrin.
@@bobby_c7671I think maybe possessing the Priest was rhe end goal. If a demon could successfully possess a priest and influence the church, that could be a long game in regards to the damage it could do.
A mother who has no “religious beliefs” desperately seeks help from a young priest who has “lost his faith”
The excellent screenplay that won an Oscar was written by the author of the book, William Peter Blatty.
Once you watch the Exorcist, something remains in your brain. In my opinion, is not just a horror movie, but an ancient idea that we the humans have in our primitive brain. We are sure it’s only a film, but deep inside we know there’s a kind of devil we must not interact with.
My dad made my siblings and I watch this because Exorcist: The Beginning was releasing at the time. Watched it at 7 years old and never again since. 💀 It was so scary to me at the time. Never shook off the face of the demon. It was just so disturbing. Couldn’t sleep for days and it was on my mind all the time. My biggest fear after watching this movie was someone I loved getting possessed.
dear lord, who makes a 7 year old watch The Exorcist? Your dad sounds like a monster.
One thing few people realize is that Max Von Sydow (the actor who played Fr. Merrin) was only 43 during the filming. That is another testament to the makeup mastery of Dick Smith.
It's also a testament to Max von Sydow. The casting director scored big on that one, as von Sydow was one of the greatest actors who ever lived.
That is insane. He looks the same in this film as he did in Rush Hour 3 nowadays
This reaction feels like two aliens that have never seen a movie before
The movie itself isn't super scary per se, it's what it can do to you afterwards that is scary. Those times when you wake up in the middle of the night and have to walk to the bathroom in the dark and your mind starts playing with you, images flashing in your mind, feeling cold, hearing noises, all the psychological things that can scare you. It's an amazing movie. Enjoyed watching along!
The scariest part of this movie for me?…..that the house this takes place in is all of four blocks from where I grew up. I saw this movie when I was 15 and refused to go anywhere near those stairs for quite awhile. Still to this day I refuse to go down or up the stairs at night. I don’t believe in any of this but none the less there is something off about those stairs.
to be fair stairs are scary and those specifically look like someone actually died by falling from them
1) Father Merrin faced the demon 10 years before in Africa and defeated it, and the demon wanted a rematch.
2) The demon (Pazuzu) did not want to kill Regan immediately but slowly. It did the most vile things to her to torture the people around her, especially her mother, because Regan was an innocent child.
3) Father Merrin died from a heart attack. He was taking Nitroglycerin pills throughout the movie.
4) At the movie's beginning, Father Karras has a crisis of faith and wants to leave the church. By the movie's end, he regains his faith and martyrs himself to save Regan. If you look closely, the demon only possesses him once his Saint Joesph medallion is ripped from his neck. As NIALL GRAY points out in their Screen Rant article titled The Exorcist Ending Explained," - he dies in the process of killing a demon to save a child. Joseph's role in Jesus's life also mirrors that of Karras's role in Regan's: the priest serves as a symbolic stand-in for the girl's absent father, and his medallion hints that his sacrifice should be considered a part of that role."
This is the first horror movie to be nominated for BEST PICTURE at the Oscars. It was nominated for a total of 10 awards and won 2: best adapted screenplay and best sound.
I watch this movie once a month. It is my favorite movie of all time. I’ve seen all the different cuts, sequels and prequels. I’ve watched the news about it making and the making of it along with interviews of the cast and director. I wish I could sit on camera and answer all your questions cuz there are answers.
I always loved horror movies which always disturbed my very Catholic parents. My mother chose to go see this movie with one of her friends from church. Freaked her the hell out.
The film is actually scary precisely because it's a true horror and not a jump scare filled movie with violence and over the top special effects. Like true horror, the film plays on human fears, trepidation and neuroses in regards to our perceived comfort and safety and does it with a wonderfully slow burn. It's a mind F**K and that's what real horror is. Scary movies today, with some rare exceptions, follow a trite formula that makes them pale in comparison to the Exorcist. Just my opinion of course, but as a horror fan, I consider this the epitome of horror and fear.
The only thing in this movie that got me was the ringing phone jumpscare. Rest of it put me to sleep.
@@TheCryptofHorrors-DerCryptaxis That's because you're a jump scare baby, as we call them. Again horror is best when it messes with your head, not just a "made you jump" stunt. But, to each their own.
Yess this is more get in your head movie.
Those other jumpscare movies they can be funny and you laugh afterwards with your friends coming out of the theater.
But this one keeps you awake, no laughter nothing, you want to have your light on for the whole week while you sleeping.
That's a horror movie
@@TheCryptofHorrors-DerCryptaxis that's because you didn't understand it.
And should go back to watching Marvel movies instead
@@jimmykarlsson2567 I low-key hate Marvel movies soylord
Moviegoers knew of the bestselling book by William Peter Blatty, who also consulted on the film, so they thought they knew what to expect. But people fainted. And the child actor Linda Blair received death threats. AND Ellen Bursten who played the mother has said that the cast and crew had so many eerie and traumatic events that the director brought in a priest to bless the set. This was a phenomenon.
I can tell you one thing, the emotional intensity of this movie remains unsurpassed after all these years. Truly a classic!
The two priests lose their lives, but they fight absolute evil at least to a draw by saving the child. You shouldn't feel worse about things after the film ends. The Exorcist isn't a bleak movie like, say, Seven. And right before Karas jumps out the window, his face goes back to normal. That could indicate that he fought the demon out through the strength of his will and regained faith.
I just watched this movie for the first time myself earlier this year after reading the novel, the movie is iconic but the novel really is an amazing read, there's a lot of even more pervasive philosophical and thought-provoking aspects which don't necessarily translate fully to the screen version. A large part of the detective's arc in the text is him investigating Burke's death and how he plays a gentle, bumbling persona outwardly but is a lot more wily and capable than he appears (he secretly takes a sample of the bird statue Regan made to compare against police evidence, and investigates Karl the servant who acts suspicious and acts as a sort of red herring for possibly being involved in Regan's condition for a while). Likewise a large part of Damien's story in the text is him constantly trying to figure out if the possession is genuine or not, going to very far lengths to try and rationalize everything abnormal that's happening to Regan until the end.
Merrin is an interesting character because that's who the entire story is named after, yet he only features at the very beginning and end; my interpretation for why is that the story came several decades after the advent of several stories that codified the 'occult detective' genre as we know it today such as Algernon Blackwood's John Silence, and rather than have the action following this 'paranormal great detective' figure centrally, Blatty sought to give a more cerebral and thought-provoking scenario of how something like that would truly play out. Ultimately, thought-provoking is one of the best terms I can think of to describe the original story; one of my favorite bits from it is when Chris (the mother) is talking to I believe another priest about the whole situation and mentions how all the evil it's brought into her life has convinced her that the devil truly exists, to which he retorts something along the lines of "if you would blame the devil for all that evil, how do you account for all the good in the world?" which regardless of how you choose to interpret that sentiment, I believe it's a good example of how the novel truly encourages reflection. It's the same reason details such as the specifics of the demon's nature are kept vague and hinted at rather than explicitly stated.
I have never read the book but I definitely want too.
@@jsapcakrrow The novel is well worth reading! I read it for the first time last year and absolutely loved it.
You know I hadn't thought of Father Merrin in light of the "occult detective" figure. It's kinda like a Solomon Kane story where it focuses on all the other characters and Kane doesn't show up until the end. What a cool way to view it!
I like how the one with pigtails said...Lets stick to Happy Horror movies. Hilarious 😂
Love the bleak ending, Regan’s *brilliant* performance, the lack of explanation of the demon’s motives, that quiet sense of dread… my favorite horror film by miles 💯🎬👻
I don't think it's that bleak.
I haven't started the reaction yet, but when I saw the thumbnail I thought, "OMG, the girls are gonna MELT!"
I hope you enjoy!
They didn’t, really weird reaction. They were confused from the first scene to the last. Seems like Marvel movies probably more their speed.
@@ejbarbs7873 yeah and they were like " there are movies today who has MUCH worse things in them "
I was like " wait.... what movies today 🤔 "
Movies today aren't even aloud to have certain language in them, let alone the crucifix scene.
They obliviously didn't get the atmosphere, the suspension, nothing of it.
Like you said Marvel green screen movies and teenage jumpscares maybe are more thier bread and butter
@@jimmykarlsson2567 Yea I didn’t get that either, they should stick with movies post like 2010 if this was so confusing to them. Couldn’t stand all the “what?, what’s happening? What?” After every single scene.
On it "taking so long to get to the main plot": I think what came before the end scenes actually 'was' the main plot. Assigning so much importance to the actual exorcism is kind of missing the point. It's just a bunch of action. But what comes before is where it's more important and relevant. You've heard "getting there is half the fun" and "the journey is the destination". What happens before the exorcism is actually where all of the story is. During the exorcism, we all have tunnel vision. There is nothing else except what is happening right now. There is so much more substance in what comes before it.
it still amazes me this was made in 1973. It's definitely one of the greatest horrors of all time, birthing an entire subgenre.
Stella and Hayley, there is a version of this movie that has a scene called the "spider crawl" that's also disturbing. I have a feeling you didn't have that scene in the version you two watched otherwise you would definitely have spoken about it. I would love to see your reaction to the "spider crawl" scene! You might want to react to it during the day if you decide to see it.
Also, when Reagan stabs herself and demands unclean acts.
It’s cause they’re just casuals who don’t care enough to do any-type of research before doing this. It’s lazy
Avoid that!!
All the lousy CGs ruined a nd dampened the realness of the movie.
Just watch that scene as a DELETED scene on its own. It didn't even really fit the narrative within the movie.
Stick to this original 1973 theatrical cut. The ONLY version that should exist.
@@isuriadireja91 It's a matter of taste.
@@isuriadireja91 agreed. The film doesn’t need the spider walk or any of the extra hospital scenes. The only scene that needs to stay is the conversation on the stairs during a break in the exorcism. That was always one of my favourite scenes from the book.
The director maintains that it's not a horror movie so much as a drama on spiritual themes. It's far beyond today's mostly formulaic, graphic, jump-scare-based horror. Among recent horrors, only Ari Aster comes close to its emotional realism, patience and artistry. What hits you like a ton of bricks is the absolute conviction and gravitas of the performances, as opposed to today's tendency to have actors just serve up plot points and exposition like waiters at a theme restaurant. In the 70's even many mainstream movies weren't interested in placating the audience with tidy explanations.
Cool reaction , great movie. I've seen The Exorcist hundreds of times over the years and I feel perhaps it's greatest virtue is not really the "horror" aspect..but it's believability (through great filmmaking, great acting, and great storytelling). The movie does take it's time with the storytelling, thus allowing character development.. If it didn't, an audience wouldn't have cared as much for the the girl, the mom, the priest, etc.. and it wouldn't have as much emotional impact. It's also one of those rare films that you can watch many times and have a different experience. When I first saw it (late 70's, HBO) I seen it as any other horror film, then for a while I really appreciated the aesthetic and beauty of the cinematography. Years later, as a parent, I seen the movie through the eyes of the mother, and now with reaction vids, etc... It really stands the test of time.
You probably have to watch it a few times to understand this brilliant movie. It also helps to look into the book and all the documentaries that have been done about it. It's actually meant to be a positive experience in the end and a reaffirmation of hope and faith.
I think that modern horror movies would, like you said, focus more on the possession because they would want you to experience the torment that the possessed is being put through leading up to the exorcism. This movie however, focused on the effect the girl being possessed had on the people around her. I focused much more on her mother's torment as she was helpless to protect her daughter from the demon tormenting her.
I used to think this movie was just okay. But the more I watch it, the better it gets! The Exorcist is a truly memorable film! Every actor does such a great job! There was also a lot of effort put into the make-up! A lot of people say this is one of the scariest movies of all time, and I can kind of see why! It really is pretty frightening! The movie was so good that it got a sequel. But unfortunately, the sequel sucked. And there were movies after that, but they must’ve been pretty forgettable since I don’t remember them. Still, the first Exorcist movie is fantastic!
Actually, the third one is a great film! It doesn't top the first one, but it is a good watch. I'd rather not talk about the 2nd and 4th ones, though...
@@luqc The third one tops this pretty easily imo. *4th* one??? Surprised I didn't know about that.
@@TheCryptofHorrors-DerCryptaxis There's a 4th and 5th ones lol. "Exorcist: The Beginning" and "Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist". Both bad movies!
Just ok?!
@Daniel Esteve I USED to think this movie was just okay, now I love it!
Fun fact: The director of the film (William Friedkin), for this scene ( 37:50), right before shooting it, slapped the crap out of the actor who played father Dyer (William O'Malley) so that he would get the emotion that he wanted from him for the shot. Apparently this director was notorious for being a hardass on set.
Also, there was a lot of strange happening surrounding the filming of this movie, to the extent that people said the whole movie was "cursed". You can Google about all of that to read all the accidents, deaths, and unexplained things which happened to during the filming of this movie.
The Exorcist was the top grossing movie of 1973 with 109 million tickets sold. It was an Event, having been a Best Selling Book, and the theaters were sold out. I had to sit down front in the 2nd row, way off to the left. Great audience reaction!
@@thegamingcook785 Very true.
@@thegamingcook785 There were violent films and films with dark imagery before but this drew in an audience who wouldn't have been to see Rosemary's Baby, A Clockwork Orange, Straw Dogs, Night of the Living Dead etc. It was also the quiet systematic progression through medical and psychiatric possibilities and the unsensational tone which was quite different to the average horror movie. It was a self-consciously serious film and there was a great deal of publicity at the time about the actuality of exorcisms. The audience was primed to think that this could really happen and this was very effective in creating an emotionally receptive audience.
Love your interpretation of this movie. Older movies tend to keep you at the edge of your seat building up that absolute fear of whats to come. Though this movie is before i was born it was always known as the pinnacle of horror movies and something my parents would never let me watch.
I`ll never forget when this film was released in the UK in 1974. The effect it created was indescribable. I really enjoyed
watching your reaction. It`s the best reaction video to this masterpiece I`ve seen.
Your reaction, 50-years after this movie was initially release, made me feel all warm and fuzzy. This is my favourite movie of all-time, and for very valid reasons. I could go in a deep dive about why I think its so special and unique, but I will say this...
I make movies for a living. I directed two horror films for Blumhouse. The reason I fell in love with the power of cinema was my experience seeing THE EXORCIST, in a cinema, at the age of 17 back in 1998. Now I had seen the film many times on video before that time (which was a huge no no as it was banned on video in the UK between 1986 and 1999), but I didn't really understand the movie until I saw it in 1998. I came out of that screening believing, for the first time, that maybe there is something beyond what we know and understand - and THAT is a very powerful and joyous thing for a film to do. I went into the movie a pretty happy go-lucky, glass half empy kind of guy, and the film only reinforced that 120mins later. I didn't see a scenario where the demon reaked havoc and killed Father Karras. I saw a movie in which a man, struggling with his own place in the world, gave his own life to safe someone he had never met (he never actually met Regan) PURELY out of kindness. The same act of self sacrifice when a soldier jumps on a grenade to protect his platoon mates. Where does that goodness come from? That is what the movie is about to me. The myster of faith. The mystery of unconditional goodness. The goodness we saw Karras struggle with (ignoring the homeless person) and then rediscover is saving Regan.
I am not religious at all... but I believe in the power of kindness. The Exorcist reinforced that.
Bless you both. That was fun to watch.
I remember when I traveled to Washington D.C. and our teacher at the time took us to those stairs. They are SO STEEP. She told us this myth about how people who try count the steps will always have a different number of climbed steps then another person who also counted them. In the end, they are just stairs, but to actually feel how steep they are its scary to even think about a fall down those stairs lol. Great reaction btw!
At the beginning of the film, Father Merrin uncovers the head of a little figurine of the demon Pazuzu, whom he recognized because he had previously exorcised the demon several years before. So then he has a premonition later that another battle with Pazuzu is coming, with the clock randomly stopping and him almost getting ran over by the carriage. So to confirm his suspicions he goes to some old ruins where there is an old statue of Pazuzu and knows for certain when he sees the dogs fighting each other (the dogs of war have been unleashed). The dissolve to Georgetown right after is to show you where this battle between good and evil is going to take place. Father Merrin periodically takes nitroglycerin pills to keep from having a heart attack, which he dies from at the end when the pills run out.
Disturbing feels like a more accurate description than scary. “Scary” seems too vague to properly convey the feeling this movie gives you. What makes it that way is how it feels so real. You have real people in a real world with real jobs, real relationships, and real problems. The way you get a more long, drawn out focus on who they are as people before the living nightmare begins makes you feel like they’re the kind of people you might personally know, and if it could happen to them, then it could happen to you, even if you’re not religious (because they weren’t). Also, the fact that in the real world, of course they would subject Reagan to all of the medical tests and psychological tests before they would even entertain the idea of possession. On top of the realism, throw in the vulgar and repulsive things she does and says that are so shocking and suddenly in your face, completely unexpected to see in a movie, *especially* in 1973. This is also why it was brilliant to take the time to show us what kind of a child Reagan really was before the possession. It shows you how much of a 180° she does and it actually hurts your heart a bit.
I saw this at 13 or 14 without my parents’ permission, thinking I was old enough. There weren’t ways to see scenes or spoilers or whatever. I just knew it was supposed to be a classic scary movie. After I watched it, I understood why my parents didn’t want me to, lol. I definitely wasn’t prepared.
The whole thing leaves you feeling so unsettled, that if you watch it at night, you’ll still get a running start to jump onto your bed like a kid. Is it logical, no, but you do it anyway, lol.
For me the film was more emotional. How they react to the people around Regan. The director always said. It's not a horror film. Just how it effects people when something out of the ordinary happens in their lives.
The intended target was Father Merrin, the demon, who's name is Pazuzu had already done battle with Merrin before and wanted to finish him off. There is a movie called "Dominion/Prequel To The Exorcist" which has to do with Merrin's first encounter with the demon. If you watch "Exorcist 2 The Heretic", it explains who the demon is and Merrin's connection to it. That's why the demon called out Merrin's name, he knew he'd come but, so did Merrin, remember when that on guy told Merrin that he wished he didn't have go and Merrin said "There's something I must do."? Well, he knew he was destined to face the demon again. There's also "The Exorcist 3", in this movie, you'll find out what happened to Damien Karras.
17:16 In the movie Exorcist they made it look like they inserted a small pipe in her carotid artery so that they could introduce a small amount of radio-opaque contrast agent in her bloodstream. That way they could x-ray her venous system.
"Angiography is a medical imaging technique used to visualize the inside, or lumen, of blood vessels and organs of the body, with particular interest in the arteries, veins, and the heart chambers. Modern angiography is performed by injecting a radio-opaque contrast agent into the blood vessel and imaging using X-ray based techniques such as fluoroscopy... Using a system of guide wires and catheters, a type of contrast agent (which shows up by absorbing the X-rays), is added to the blood to make it visible on the X-ray images."
not a suicide, but a sacrifice.
This was the first movie to feature a Ouija board as anything more than the game sold by Parker Bros.
It was a victory in the sense that Karras did not lose his faith, but instead sacrificed himself to save the child.
You girls have hit so many nails on the heads with your predictions and assessments, as the plot progresses. The exposition is a jumble at first, but it all forms a wonderfully crafted jigsaw puzzle, and the image is so clear at the end. You girls are brilliant. So on target.
Love the movie because it eas ahead of its time and as mentioned it was seen in theatres and not comfy at home. I was hoping to see the absolute horror of the Crucifix scene because thats the one scene that is fun to see facial reactions from and was probably the most disturbing scene ever.
This was a Christmas movie, BTW. Possibly the first Christmas blockbuster movie. Crowds were lined about around the block to see this. This movie, "Jaws," and "Star Wars" were all huge phenomena movies. Very much captured the attention of the popular culture, influencing future films. A lot like how a later film, "The Silence of the Lambs," captured the attention of the audience and influenced the industry.
Wild that the old age makeup on Max Von Sydow was so good that he looks almost exactly like he looked when he himself reached the age he's supposed to be in this film. Also, on a separate note, it's very interesting that you have scientists suggesting a religious approach like exorcism, and you have the religious man suggesting science.
My buddies from work and I went to the theater to see this movie everyone was talking about. We got there late so had to sit in the front row looking up at the screen. It did not disappoint and after Steve who wanted to be a priest at the time said “I need a drink.” On the news it was reported that people were getting sick, fainting and running out of the buildings. The was an onslaught of individuals asking for an exorcisms. It was quite a phenomenon at the time. Btw, we had no idea of what to expect from this film.
A lot of older movies don't insult the audience with spoon-feeding the entire plot or premise. I remember reading about when it was shown in theaters. People were shocked and freaked out and some left during the movie. It was shocking for its time. Poor Linda Blair. To have that role as a young actress. Wow. The director (William Friedkin) has done completely different movies and genres. He's famous for The French Connection, a police drama done around the same time.
Linda Blair knew very little as it was being filmed. Most of the really nasty stuff was done by her double.
I have always considered The Exorcist more of a drama than a "horror" film. William Friedkin the director said that you take from the film what you bring with you , in other words it is a film that is open to many points of view depending on your own perspective. Many people feel the ending is depressing and a downer , the demon wins etc... but I agree with the writer Peter Blatty who considered the ending uplifting. The pld priest is shown to be disturbed in the opening of the film perhaps he is struggling with his faith and later we are shown that the younger priest is also struggling with his faith but in the end we see that the young priest realizes that even though his faith in his religion may be in question his true strength is in the power of God/Jesus, love and he sacrifices his own life to save another just as Christ did and THAT is what defeats the demon... not "religion".
17:00 They are doing a cerebral angiography (x-rays of the circulatory system of the brain). They inject a contrast medium (an x-ray opaque liquid) into her brain via carotid artery in the neck in order to make arteries and veins visible to the x-rays. And yes, today the method is similar but with more modern equipment.
This movie was a huge hit when it came out and greatly escalated what could be shown in a fim. M*A*S*H came out in 1970 and was the first Hollywood studio production to have the F-word in it. It was only said once, and there was a little blood because they were surgeons. Three years later The Exorcist comes out. So, perhaps, you can imagine how vulgar and shocking this movie was upon the time of its release.
On a happier note, Linda Blair made a spoof parity movie with Leslie Nielsen called Repossessed. Of course, this was after the years of nightmares and PTSD-like trauma that Linda experienced from making this movie had subsided. 💙💙💙
In my opinion I don't think it's necessary to see The Exorcist 2, but I hope you don't skip The Exorcist 3. The third movie was written and directd by the author of the Exorcist novel, and is a really good movie even if you remove the horror element.
When you said at 47:00 that the "movie was quiet; everything felt wrong," you put your finger on one of the best things about the movie: the focus was on the people themselves, and their struggle, and not on manipulating the audience with sensory overload. This is a movie that treated its audience like adults.
Father Karras invited the demon IN after his protective holy chain was yanked. Once IN you hear Father Karras yell NO before jumping out out the window.
He sacrificed himself to save the little girl.
It’s obvious you two didn’t catch all of it.
You two didn’t understand it completely.
Re-watch the film. Read the book. Watch documentaries about the Exorcist. You’ll learn why many consider this the scariest movie ever.
Unfortunately, you both watched the theatrical cut and not the full cut of this movie. This is what I first saw in theatres when it was rereleased in the late 1970s. The other cut includes a shocking effect on the staircase and ends with a dialogue between the detective and the priest, Dwyer. This is important as it sets the relationship for the book Legion (Exorcist III: Legion in the theatres). That second sequel is very recommended as it continues that relationship and it was directed by the author himself. A second movie I would like to recommend you watch is The Ninth Configuration (Twinkle, Twinkle, Killer Kane for its initial release). Configuration has the same type of dark humor that Exorcist III has and is an incredibly original and thought-provoking movie with perhaps one of the very best "long burns" in movie history. In fact, Exorcist III has one of the best (almost) one-shot scares in cinema as well.
How did you see the directors cut in the late 70's when it wasn't released until 2000? They didn't have the computer tech to erase the wires from the stunt woman coming down the stairs. Besides, that's the only scene in the directors cut that is any good, they add some unnecessary CGI in places and add extra scenes that draw the movie out.
@@dr.loomis2490 The theatrical cut was rereleased in the late 70s and that's what I saw; the version that the reaction was for. I watched the director's cut when it was released on DVD.
@@bighuge1060 Ahhhh ok.
@@dr.loomis2490 Additionally, I was an usher in a quad theatre when this was shown and my job was to usher the matinee and then, alone in the building, clean the theatres for the evening showings. I'm not making this up but every time I went into the theatre showing The Exorcist, I always expected the projector to turn on, Regan (seated on the bed with her head turned backwards) to address me. It really freaked me out. And the theatres being dimly lit didn't help.
I would always recommend the theatrical cut rather than the 'Special Edition', which has added digital VFX and a new sound mix. The extended cut has one really shocking scene (it's a terrifying moment - but it is so over the top that I think it's good that it was cut). I think the original theatrical release is absolutely perfect. You can't make it perfecter.
20:46 "Why is her arm like that?" That is a typical part of the procedure for hypnosis, persuading the subject that their hand is getting lighter and lighter until it raises up that way.
23:38 "Is that the thing?" It isn't the statuette at the beginning of the movie. Regan makes little clay sculptures and paints them, like that wild bird she shows her mother. The church desecrations also use clay sculpturing and wild paints. The small sculpture that the detective finds is a clue, meant to suggest that Burke had it on him when he was thrown out the window by "Regan". The idea in all this is that the demon* possessed her, went over to the church and desecrated that statue. The book is much more detailed, so you may want to read it, but, he he, not alone at night ;)
*The demon is Mesopotamian and named "Pazuzu", the "personification of the southwestern wind, and held kingship over the lilu wind demons". Pazuzu is represented by both the statuette and the large statue back in Iraq that the older priest faced.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pazuzu
32:18 "Oh, it's so cold." The set for Regan's room was literally refrigerated for that reason.
34:12 By the way, I don't believe that Regan's head spun around physically; those were only visions produced by the demon, like priest's mother sitting in the bed, the demon's appearance near the bed, etc.
37:08 I don't believe that the demon killed the older priest or not directly. Rather, he died of a heart attack. Note that he was taking what appeared to have been nitroglycerin tablets (the little white pills in the ornate pill container) for a heart condition.
I think that's a correct interpretation. The possessed girl seems almost befuddled or bemused at his death.
Damien the priest was an actual boxer at the time. The writer actually was a Georgetown grad. The true sequel even though it changed Lt. Kinderman from Lee J Cobb from 12 Angry Men to (George C. Scott) in The Exorcist 3. Both Linda Blair and Oscar winner Ellen Burstyn will be back for the new The Exorcist trilogy. In The Exorcist explained video, you see Regan doing art so she must be the one who broke into the church and did the damage under the demon's influence. Not the devil but Regan was possessed by the African wind demon Pazuzu. One of the medical technicians in the film ended up being an actual serial killer who went to prison. Linda Blair was injured during filming and the set burned down hence a "cursed" set.
The "old" Father Merrin actor was actually 43 years old at the time, with old aged makeup that ended up being what he looked like later in his real life.
I've watched this movie several times and I've read the book it's based on. The more I've watched it the more I admire it. And I may be the only person with this opinion, but I actually find it somewhat uplifting. We're faced with the ugliest, most vile things that evil can throw at us. What the demon says and does through Regan is worse than we could imagine. What it does with the crucifix and Regan's mom is meant to be as shocking and vulgar as can be. And yet, we also see Father Merrin, who has faced this demon before and knows he's unlikely to survive another encounter with it, does it again anyway to save the life of a child. Father Karras, who's not even sure he believes but knows there's a young girl who has no other options (a young girl he never actually met, by the way), helps her anyway and ultimately gives his life for her. Regan's mom continues to do everything she can for her daughter, despite the evil that's taken over her body and put her through hell. Even the nanny and everyone else in the house stay despite everything that's going on. Despite everything the demon threw at everybody, they chose love. Ultimately, the girl is saved, because love won. It left her and Father Karras got his last rites. To me, it's a powerful idea to think about. Even when we're faced with the absolute worst evil, love always wins.
The Exorcist really is the scariest movie of all time. And I think a lot people must have had a lot of nightmares when they watched this movie for the first time.
Especially at that time in 1973
I can top that. Yes, the exorcist is an excellent horror film. It pales in comparison for horror and being genuinely scary when you compare it to the chucklefest from the BBC in 1984 called "threads." Put it this way, when it was shown, it traumatised so many people, the press referred to the showing as being 'the night Britain didn't sleep." It had people attempt to take their own lives!
@@evorock that wasn’t a horror movie though
@@nsasupporter7557 it might as well have been lol
@@evorock what was so bad about threads? I guess I should just watch it myself
Fun Facts: The demon face was provided by a woman named Eileen Dietz. It wasn't a man's face. A woman also provided the demon's voice, Mercedes McCambridge. She had a low growl from a lifetime of cigarettes and whiskey.
Sometimes it's best to just let experiences wash over you, rather than continually look for understanding and meaning.
Great reaction! It's always nice to see what people think of this series. I always liked how the possession was a slow progression, how the supernatural wasn't considered until the medical was ruled out. How the initial signs of haunting aren't jumped on like 'Oh! didja see, didja!'
There are 4/5 movies in the Exorcist series; this one, which is fantastic; the second one, which does not in fact exist and all the film reels burned in a fire, so sad, oh well, never mind; the third one which is a Goddamn masterpiece and you should definitely watch because it's brilliant; and the 4th/ 5th one which was made as a prequel/backstory for Father Merrin but the first cut was so awful they hired a new director to come in and reshoot and rewrite the story and that was bad too, so the studio said fuck it and released both of them to try and recoup the cost. There was also a 2 season tv show on... AMC? that was actually pretty good so obviously it was cancelled.
Also, fun fact: the medical scene with Regan in the hospital with the brain scan was so accurate, medical schools used it as a visual aid for a while.
This was fun to read, I agree and good job.
You're comment on the 2nd one, lol!
It is scary but mostly so very sad.
At least it's not Rosemary's Baby
AKA "Gaslighting: The Movie"
Did you know there is 2 seasons tv series The Exorcist related to this movie.. And there is a The Exorcist 2023 mostly releases oct
For context, this came out in the winter:
This movie was such a massive hit, that shows were regularly selling out. On one occasion people stood in a line for 4hrs. to get tickets, they did this during a deadly blizzard.
The shot at the beginning where Merrin was facing the statue. Look again. It's like two antagonists ready to fight.
Good on you Stella for knowing Tubular Bells
Oh! ....you guys should have chose to view the Special edition of the movie!!! (much more layered with a couple of more SHOCKING scenes! It's even crazier than this, if you can believe that!) Very impressed with your analysis. You guys actually "understood" the fact that this movie was very "misunderstood". This film was done in a documentary style (with a very slow burn to immerse yourselves in the characters) with no real jump scares and a focus on faith and religion to "offend" or unsettle" you (which is actually MUCH more disturbing than a quick jump scare). Anyway, big fan! You guys are terrific!
Yeah that’s a good point always is the extended cuts that’s are the best. The shorter theatrical versions of films always leaves something to be desired. But I really like this film. I have to say the first time I watched sit I liked it just fine but now that I watched it a few times I love it 😂
I saw this movie in the theater in 1973, I was 17 years old, it was an experience I'll never forget! People were leaving the theater, some were running, I had to sleep with a nightlight for over a week, LOL!
I remember reading in the newspaper that all across the country, (US), people were throwing up in theaters, and others were running out! terrible high pitched screaming was the norm for this movie.
You need to remember this was 1973, 50 years ago, before the internet, before social media,. It was a much more naivete population in many ways back then. It certainly a groung breaking film to say the least.
A side note: William Friedkin the director earned the name "Wild Willie" for many reasons. One of them was deciding at the very last minute for no good reason that Regan's makeup had to be changed. Because of that makeup master Dick Smith called a young man he had met at a convention to help him catch up and keep up with the changes. That young man was Rick Baker, who won the first Oscar for makeup for An American Werewolf in London.
The version you've never seen (directors cut) is a bit different than the original theatrical cut of the film.
There would be no modern horror movies without 'The Exorcist', this movie paved the way for everything that came after it. The fact you were 'creeped out' or 'disturbed' they are the signs of being truly terrified and you just don't think you were 'scared' because there were no jump scares or loud music or sounds, which are actually cheap tricks to fool you that you were scared
The Exorist was ground breaking as a movie and a soundtrack.
This was considered the scariest film of all time... at that time. My mom was seriously traumatized when she saw it. But it's probably pretty quaint by today's standard and by how much more sophisticated audiences are today. It' s still a great film regardless.
One could argue that The Exorcist is from a more sophisticated era than today. This movie has a realism to it that is lost on most present day films which are, in comparison, kind of simple and cartoonish. Now, I'm not talking about how real it looks, but how real the experience is. Kind of hard to explain.
I love how you said was, as if the movie still isn't considered the scariest ever made!!!
Most scary movies today have many jump scares (that’s it) but although 50 years old it’s by far for many the scariest and most disturbing movie ever. To me it’s in a category of its own. No movie scared me or many like this one.
youre right but there are a couple of scenes that would have Hollywood going crazy over,even today re: the cross scene. I doubt that would make it into a current day film.
This movie scares you for days later, as you think of it hits you, it invades your dreams and thoughts.
There are a number of people who believe this movie was cursed. Strange things happened; the director suddenly having a violent temper, firing people without warning, and a large fire destroyed the set while killing multiple workers.
Total nonsense.
-A director with a bad temper is not a curse, nor is it strange.
-Firing people happens all the time
-The fire did not kill a single person. it destroyed the sets.
-Jack MacGowran, who played director Burke Dennings, died from complications related to influenza, which he caught during the London flu epidemic in 1973 after production ended.
-the old woman who played Karras' mom passed later of natural causes after production ended.
-a couple of relatives of the hundreds of cast & crew died, during the course of the year, as normally happens in life.
Stop lying & spreading stupid tabloid nonsense.
A couple of factoids from an old guy- 1. Georgetown is an elite rich neighborhood of Washington DC. Populated by govt elites, media, elites, etc... I could see a wealthy actress living there. 2. Catholic Priests take a vow of poverty and get paid a pittance. Enough for their basic essentials and they are given free housing, but in small dorm type settings, like in this film. Damien is a Jesuit which is like the Catholic Elite class, he went to schools such as Harvard and Princeton. His Uncle was telling him that if he went into private psychology practice instead of a Priest, he would have tons of money and could put his Mom in a super nice nursing home. 3. The brain scans done to Reegan are pre-MRI technology. MRI is where they put you in that tube like thing and scan it. The doctors were basically giving her "Dental X-rays" to her brain. 4. The attic scene where the candle flames up, was caused by a small gas leak, that built up over time. It can happen in older homes that use natural gas for the stove, heat, etc....
Beautifully made, I remember the sense of dread experienced by the audience every time they showed the staircase. Masterful adaption. Intelligent with a real gut impact.
For more movies with similar themes, I recommend the Omen trilogy
1 and 2 were decent. The 3rd, wasnt that great IMO.
@@bobby_c7671, I agree with that. The second is arguably the best. The fourth film and remake aren't worth mentioning
This movie is great.
Honestly, people don’t understand that “disturbing/eerie” is part of being “scary.” That’s the point of horror films. People need to understand that.
Also, it’s not the Devil. The demon’s name is Pazuzu. The Devil is more powerful but in the other Exorcist movies, Pazuzu have lied about being the Devil. People need to understand that they ain’t gonna use the Devil in any movies because realistically, the Devil is too powerful. People gotta stop with these.
And the fun facts are actually fun. SMH-
The film was adapted by William Peter Blatty's 1971 novel of the same name. Aspects of Blatty's novel were inspired by the 1949 exorcism performed on an anonymous boy known as "Roland Doe" or "Robbie Mannheim" by the Jesuit priest William S. Bowdern.
The true identity of the boy was revealed in late 2021. His real name was Ronald Edwin Hunkeler, who grew to be a successful NASA engineer. He contributed to the famous Apollo missions of the 1960s, and helped to put humans on the moon in 1969 by patenting the technology that helped space shuttle panels withstand extreme heat. He never discussed his experiences and always feared exposure. He died in 2020, just before his 86th birthday. The debate over whether it was a genuine possession or mental illness is still ongoing, however.
The Exorcist is the first horror film to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. It won Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Sound.
The movie's director, William Friedkin, insisted on realism, filming the prologue in political unstable northern Iraq, using live special effects and casting real priests and medical personnel. Crew also recalled that he was temperamental, often firing people without warning. He also deliberately made the cast uncomfortable and went to great lengths to manipulate the actors to get genuine reactions. Like putting the set where the exorcism scenes took place to temperatures down to −20°F (−29°C) to make their breath visible, and slapping them or firing blanks without warning to generate a shaken reaction. This behavior led the crew to call him "Wacky Willy". Ironically, Friedkin's office was at 666th Fifth Avenue in New York.
Also, a fire destroyed most of the set (except for Regan's bedroom), some crewmembers and their family members died (along with the assistant cameraman's newborn child), Linda Blair (Regan) & Ellen Burstyn (Chris) suffered accidental long-term back & spinal injuries and actors Jack MacGowran (Father Dyer) and Vasiliki Maliaros (Father Karras's mother) both died before the film was released. Production took twice as long as scheduled and cost almost three times the initial budget. The accidents and deaths have made some people belief that the film was cursed.
The scene where Regan projectile vomits at Father Karras only took one take. The vomit was intended to hit Jason Miller in the chest, but the plastic tubing misfired, hitting him in the face. His reaction of shock and disgust while wiping away the vomit is genuine.
The film's sound was notable for its bizarre sound effects and, in some instances, a complete lack of sound. A disturbing fact is that many of the demonic sound effects used were actually recordings of animals being killed in a slaughterhouse.
Originally, there was the infamous spider-walk down the stairs scene, which showed Regan sticking out a long, snakelike tongue and attacking the nanny - ruclips.net/video/5Pr-I0V0ZOc/видео.html. The scene is often miscredited to Linda Hager but the stunt was actually performed by Ann Miles. However, it was cut from the film just before it was released. Friedkin apparently cut it believing it was too early in the film for such a drastic effect on Regan to be visible and because there was no way to hide the wires from the harness. Almost 30 years later, Friedkin changed his mind and added the scene back for the extended 2000 version, with the wires digitally removed but instead showing Regan with blood flowing from her mouth - ruclips.net/video/i33KwUtm4ks/видео.html
The voice of the demon was portrayed by Mercedes McCambridge, who went to extreme lengths to perfect the distorted voice. An alcoholic, she actually gave up sobriety and drank heavily, she chain-smoked cigarettes, ate raw eggs. She was also physically bound to a chair with torn sheets. McCambridge ended up suing Friedkin and Warner Bros because they didn't credit her for the voice of the demon.
Additionally, Linda Blair’s double, Eileen Dietz, also sued for not being credited for the vomiting sequences.
Linda Blair received a Best Supporting Actress nomination at the Oscars before it was known that she didn't actually provide the voice of the demon. The rules said once she was given the nomination it could not be withdrawn, but the controversy about Blair being given credit for another actress' work probably ruined her chances of winning.
Once the film was released, many people in the audience fainted, vomited, ran out of the theater or had to be be carried in a stretcher. This was in mainly two scenes; when Regan undergoes a carotid angiography/arteriogram, in which a needle inserted into Regan's neck spurts blood, and the crucifix masturbation scene. The angiography scene caused audiences the most discomfort, most likely because they could identify with that more than being possessed by a demon. This procedure entails cerebrospinal fluid being drained to a small amount from around the brain and replaced with air, oxygen, or helium to allow the structure of the brain to show up more clearly on an X-ray picture.
Medical professionals have described the scene, to reflect changes in medicine, as a realistic depiction of the procedure. Friedkin even claimed that the scene was used to train radiologists for years after the film's release.
In the angiography scene, the blonde bearded man who assists the doctor is Paul Bateson. He was an x-ray technician at NYU Medical Center where that scene was shot and got to be an extra. In 1979, he was convicted of the murder of Addison Verrill, a film critic, and was sentenced to a minimum of 20 years in prison. Bateson ultimately served 24 years and was released on parole in 2003. But he also became the prime suspect in what were known as the "the bag murders" from 1977-1978, in which six male victims were mutilated and dismembered, their remains wrapped in black plastic bags and dumped in the Hudson River. He actually bragged how he picked up men in gay bars, had sex with them and then murdered & dismembered their bodies and put them into plastic bags "for fun". Although investigators believed his story, he was never officially charged and those murders have never been solved. These murders were the inspiration for another one of William Friedkins films, Cruising from 1980, starring Al Pacino.
There are several sequels/prequels and a TV show, none of which I have seen though. But Blumhouse is making another franchise which is supposed to be a "direct sequel" to this one. Ellen Burstyn will reprise her role as Chris and Leslie Odom Jr. will be starring in it too. A theatrical release for the first film, The Exorcist: Believer, is scheduled for October 13 this year.
This movie was based on an actual possession of a boy instead of a girl.
When this movie came out my 16 year old cousin went to see it in the theater. When he got home he couldn’t sleep in his bedroom he had to sleep with his parents in their room. He slept with them for a week.
So awesome to see the girls react to one of the scariest films for the first time.