(William Friedkin, 1973)

I vividly remember being sixteen and attending a friend’s birthday sleepover at his house with a group of our friends. My friend, whose birthday it was, insisted on putting on his DVD of The Exorcist and seemed proud of boasting that it was a favourite of his, despite probably being too young to see it. I felt very uncomfortable with the idea of watching it, being averse to horror, and looked away from the screen throughout pretty much the entire film. I recently came to the realisation that to be a true cinephile, it would be necessary to see all kinds of film and so the other night, I decided to give this one a go. By modern standards, I did not feel that it lived up to its name as the “scariest film of all time”, as it has been described, but I nonetheless found it a chilling watch and I appreciate why it is revered by fans of the horror genre and cinema in general.

The film, based on William Peter Blatty’s novel of the same name, opens with a scene taking place during an archaeological dig in Iraq which introduces the titular exorcist of the film, Father Merrin, played by Max von Sydow. The cinematography here with a shot of the desert being overlooked by a golden sunset could well have inspired a shot of a similar sunset during the digging scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark when Indiana Jones, Sallah and their companions are searching for the Well of Souls, the supposed location of the Ark of the Covenant. During the excavation, Merrin discovers a medallion depicting Saint Joseph and an artefact showing Pazuzu, a demon in Mesopotamian mythology. He seeks out a statue of Pazuzu and ominously sees two dogs fighting, a haunting image. For me, this opening gives the film a sense of weight. As you see the events of the narrative unfold, you realise the historical and mystical significance of the antagonist, Pazuzu the demon, with its ancient origins; it is a force to be reckoned with.

The story moves to Georgetown in Washington D.C, where single mother and actor Chris MacNeil (played by Ellen Burstyn) is raising her daughter Regan (played by Linda Blair) with the help of her friend Sharon Spencer and servant Karl. A sinister series of events is set in motion when Regan, innocently playing with an Ouija board, unleashes Pazuzu who possesses her and wreaks havoc on Georgetown. Regan is brilliantly played by Blair, who truly conveys the character of a sweet girl transformed by a demonic incarnation. She causes her whole bed to shake when she convulses, acts violently towards visitors trying to cure her, and even levitates above her bed during the exorcism in the final act of the film. She becomes covered in sores and her face is haggard. The special effects are impressive for their time, though the moments when we see Regan spewing green vomit do look somewhat unrealistic. This, however, is a minor criticism considering how effectively the film makes use of practical effects.  

Ellen Burstyn delivers a strong performance as Regan’s mother, who, disconcerted by strange noises coming from the attic of the house, realises that something seriously wrong is afoot when her daughter is disturbed by the demonic presence. Regan undergoes a series of brutal medical tests including noisy scans and a cerebral angiography (an imaging procedure which involves a needle being inserted into Regan’s neck), a scene which many found too upsetting. Chris is angry when the doctors attempting to help Regan dismiss her problems as simply medical. To her, Regan’s possession is too unusual for any rational medical explanation. It is heart-breaking to watch a mother effectively dealing with the loss of her daughter and even more so because the moments when we first meet Regan and her mother on screen demonstrate such a warm and loving relationship between the pair. Burstyn conveys a rollercoaster of emotions during the scenes when Regan is captured by supernatural powers and sells the character convincingly to the audience.

 When the medical professionals finally suggest approaching the Catholic Church and considering the possibility of an exorcism, Chris is taken aback. She approaches Father Karras (a psychiatrist and priest who up to this point in the film had been losing faith due to his mother’s ill health) and begs him for assistance. He is at first reluctant to seek an exorcism for Regan but is eventually convinced that it may be their only hope of saving her. Despite being conflicted about his faith, he is clearly a good person who tries to do all he can for the MacNeil family. Miller brings a tenderness to the role and his scenes with Father Dyer (played by real-life priest Father William O’Malley) are touching. Although it is Dyer who tries to pick Karras up when he is doubting his religious beliefs, it is the McNeil cry for help that truly restores his spirituality and compels him to call upon Father Merrin to perform an exorcism.

The Exorcist is not an easy watch, but it is a very rewarding one. The slow-building tension, excellent performances and startling effects combine to deliver a profound and thought-provoking piece of psychological horror which gets under the skin. The viewer feels for Chris MacNeil as she endures the ordeal of watching her possessed daughter tear the household apart and is frustrated by the inability of the medical profession to find a cure. The viewer sympathises with Father Karras as he questions his religion whilst seeing his mother suffer with mental illness. It is a film which raises questions about the reliability and ethics of medical science and examines in-depth the theme of religious superstition. Although not for the faint-of-heart, it is a masterwork of the genre that any lover of film should seek out.

© Daniel Cummings 2023