Adapted from the novel The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty
Actress Chris MacNeil is wrapping up a film in Washington, D.C. when her 12-year-old daughter Regan begins behaving rather strangely. And then very strangely. And then extraordinarily strangely. After consulting many doctors and psychiatrists, all of whom are baffled by Regan's negative test results in the face of her worsening condition, non-religious Chris begins to wonder if her daughter might be possessed by a demon, and seeks out a priest to perform an exorcism.
I'm not generally into horror films, but I knew that this one was very highly acclaimed, so I was glad when I noticed that this project was giving me an excuse to watch it, since I kind of wanted to see it but wasn't going to go out of my way to watch something that sounded so terrifying. Honestly, it wasn't as scary as I was anticipating, although it was plenty disturbing. I feel like I sort of did this wrong, though, because I ended up reading the 40th anniversary edition of the book and watching the extended director's cut of the film, so I didn't have quite the same experience as the Academy voters would have. Although I seriously doubt that most people who vote on the Best Adapted Screenplay winner have actually read the source material for all the nominees. But I digress.
As one expects when the author if the source material also writes the screenplay, this movie is very similar to the novel. I'm pretty sure that everything that's in the movie is also in the book, although there are several aspects of the book that did not make it into the film, as is generally the case with adaptations of novels. Most of the changes didn't really surprise me. I know of at least one scene that I read that was added for the 40th anniversary edition, so obviously that wasn't going to be in the film. The novel also repeats essentially the same conversation over and over again between Chris and various doctors, and I think the movie did a good job of capturing the gist of that without including all of it. There were a few side stories that helped develop some of the secondary characters more that I was a little disappointed not to see in the film, but I get that it wanted to focus more on the main story. One change that I was not expecting was the movie's elimination of the book on witchcraft, devil worship, possession, etc. that ends up in Regan's room. In the novel, the doctors and even the priest infer that Regan's condition was mostly induced by her subconscious mind's use of her knowledge of the contents of this book, which is ultimately what convinces most of them that an exorcism will cure her. I'm not sure if this was another plot point that was added in the 40th anniversary edition, but it seemed significant enough to the story that I was surprised that the film didn't include it.
Mostly, though, I was surprised by how much of the novel did make it into the film. The book is incredibly vulgar and obscene, and while the film does omit some of the swearing and most of the details about black mass and the specific desecrations of the church, it included a lot more vulgarity than I was expecting. There were definitely things I read thinking, "Well that's not going to be in the film" that actually were in the film. I can see why it was such a shocking and controversial film when it came out because some of that stuff is shocking even by today's standards. Which I think is partly why it is still considered one of the greatest horror movies ever made. Since I'm not a horror fan, I didn't particularly like this story, but I can recognize and appreciate that both the novel and the film did an amazing job of telling it. I'm not sad that this project gave me an excuse to experience The Exorcist, but I have no desire to revisit it anytime soon.
After this rather bizarre supernatural hiatus, I will now return to the Corleone family with Best Picture Winner The Godfather Part II.
No comments:
Post a Comment