The Exorcist, released on December 26, 1973, created an enormous response from viewers and critics, from loving the film to hating it, all for different reasons. People reacted to all aspects of the film . religion, violence, gore, and sex. A phenomenon had been created. The sensationalism surrounding the film was perpetuated by moviegoers and journalists, who had reported of fainting, heart attacks, vomiting, and miscarriages during the film. The Exorcist was even blamed for a murder in the UK. The extreme emotions evoked by the story is generally attributed to the more superficial elements of the film, but William Peter Blatty, writer of the original novel and of the screenplay, had intended it to be much deeper and thought-provoking. The annotated bibliography contains sources that reveal multiple layers of the film, attempting to capture a piece of the full range of responses.

Magistrale, Tony and Michael A. Morrison, ed. Dark Night's Dreaming : Contemporary American Horror Fiction. Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1996.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PS374.H67 D37 1996

The Exorcist is based on the book of the same name written by William Peter Blatty, who also wrote the screenplay. Chapter 6, “Casting Out Demons: The Horror Fiction of William Peter Blatty” details Blatty’s inspirations for writing the novel and his thoughts on the reaction to his work. Even the book had an enormous impact, spending 55 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list. From this, the more serious intentions of the story can be understood without the visual stimulations of the movie to distract.

Douglas E. Winter writes that Blatty brought a new legitimacy to the horror genre, that he “ushered the reign of Stephen King and the stylized horror genre in the late 1970s and early 1980s” (84). Blatty was raised as a Roman Catholic, having attended a Catholic grammar school, a Jesuit high school, and a Jesuit university – Georgetown. Before writing The Exorcist, he had already published 8 books and produced 11 film scripts, and was known as a comedy writer. It wasn’t until 1971 that he wrote the book based on a successful exorcism he had read about in the Washington Post in 1949. Blatty said, “It seemed a validation of what we were being taught as Catholics, and certainly a validation of our hopes for immortality. Because if there were evil spirits, why not good? Why not a soul? Why not life everlasting?” (qtd. in 87). It was this confirmation that Blatty tried to evoke through his novel, though he concedes that “the real point of the book is nowhere to be found in the film” (qtd. in 91).

Winter praises The Exorcist as a book that confronts religious issues in a thought-provoking manner. He also discusses the social undertones of the story, of women's liberation and the rebellion of youth. The popularity of the book can be attributed to its sensationalism and to the pronounced taboos, but Blatty's real intention, as shown by Winter, was to reveal his hopeful attitude of what the exorcism implies about the justification of religion and the afterlife.

Marriott, James. Horror films. London: Virgin, 2004.
Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995.9.H6 M323 2004

 

The Exorcist succeeded in large part due to the hype surrounding the film. In fact, there was just as much controversy within the filmmaking process as there was about the film. In the section titled “The Exorcist”, James Marriot provides details behind the making of the film, from inception to the post-release reactions. In it, it is revealed that the film may well have been a product of the director, William Friedkin, rather than that of William Peter Blatty.

Blatty initially wanted to write a factual case history, based on an article he had read in the Washington Post in 1949, but the family had no interest. Producer Paul Monash offered Blatty $400,000 for a six-month option to film his novel, who then sold the option to Warner Brothers for a reported $641,000. After Monash was cut from the project, Blatty wanted an agnostic director but ended up with William Friedkin, a Jewish director who forced Blatty to create a second draft of the script in order to work with him.

Friedkin was a difficult director; having no connections to Iraq, he had to make additional promises to Iraqi filmmakers in order to shoot the opening scenes there. He opted to have all mechanical effects and little optical effects – for the exorcism sequence, the entire room was enclosed and refrigerated. Blatty criticized many of Friedkin’s techniques, such as the spinning head sequence which he deemed unnecessary, saying that “supernatural doesn’t mean impossible” (qtd. in 132). There were additional dangers on the set: a rig that was attached to a mold that had been made for Linda Blair came loose during shooting, requiring back treatment. Friedkin used these difficulties to show journalists and the public that the movie was cursed, increasing the buildup of attention around the film.

After the film’s release, which opened in only 30 cinemas, the term “cinematic neurosis” became popular, when psychiatric problems were exposed from disturbing films in people with no history of mental illness. The movie was blamed for criminal and suicidal acts, including one incident in the UK in October 1974, when a 14-year-old boy blamed for the movie for his murder of a 9-year-old girl. The MPAA changed the rating from R to 17 certificate from increasing public pressure, and the UK gave it an X rating. The public was so caught up in the hype that the movie became the highest grossing horror movie internationally. In this section, Marriott explains the creation and perpetuation of that hype that would dispel any oddities surrounding the movie.

Dempsey, Michael. "The Exorcist." Film Quarterly. Vol. 27, No. 4 (Summer, 1974): 61-62.

The Exorcist was extremely popular among the viewers, driving out millions to see the spectacle of the film. Though sensationalized in the media and among the viewing public, the critics had a much different view. The review in Film Quarterly expresses a critic’s opinion compared to the masses, showing that the film produced just as strong a negative effect.

Michael Dempsey opens his review with the line, “The Exorcist is the trash bombshell of 1973, the aesthetic equivalent of being run over by a truck” (61). He proceeds by criticizing first the public response of the film; he believes that people inappropriately associate shock value with film quality. As William Zuckerman noted that people went to the theater to be stimulated by fear, Dempsey blames William Friedkin and William Peter Blatty for manipulating “the most primitive fears and prejudices of the audience” (61).

Dempsey also criticizes the filmmakers, in particular the ideas that Blatty attempted to reveal in the film. In regards to theology, he calls Blatty’s portrayal “idiotic”. The use of an exorcism of a young girl does not prove the existence of God, as Dempsey writes “…faith, faith in what? In a God who allows an innocent girl to be tortured?” (62). He asserts that Blatty’s faith stems not from the love of God, but from the fear of hell. Dempsey also evaluates the originality of the film, citing a list of movies with similar elements, and the acting, calling Linda Blair’s performance a “film technician’s Frankenstein” (62).

Although Dempsey’s review is from a rather extreme point of view, it is important to understand the full range of response to the film. The explosive response to The Exorcist came from many diverse viewpoints, Dempsey representing the opinion of the film from a cinematic perspective.

 Smith, Jeffrey A. "Hollywood Theology: The Commodification of Religion in Twentieth-Century Films." Religion and American Culture. 11.2 (Summer, 2001): 191-231.

 

 
William Peter Blatty’s inspiration for The Exorcist was a Washington Post article about a successful exorcism, in which he has said that it confirmed his belief in God and religion. Presenting this idea to the public in film format was a major challenge, as it can be difficult to discern the religious message among the externalities, such as special effects. In this article, Jeffrey A. Smith documents the evolution of religion in film throughout the twentieth century, presenting examples in a large number of films including The Exorcist.

Smith shows that the treatment of religion in film transitioned from being respectful and institutional until the 1960s, with MPPDA codes prohibiting the use of God’s name in vain, to being about an individual’s quest for religion later in the century. The Cold War era brought about emotional distance in this topic and eventually, God was being personified into people or characters, and humor was used to address religion. The movement from divine spirits to earthly objects translated into The Exorcist with the evil powers possessing a human life. In this sense, The Exorcist was a film that would classify as a transitional movie among religion in film.

Smith notes that The Exorcist could easily have received an X rating or obscenity prosecution, but the notorious parts were in the context of a church ritual. He proceeds to say that the film “avoids opportunities for theological exposition and can be experienced as little more than a horror show” (214). Although moralistic endings can be attached to possession movies, he accuses films of the “satanic power genre” as being little more than a spectacle and an exploitation of religion. A religious view on the film is essential in assessing whether Blatty achieved his goals, and Smith’s evaluation of religion in twentieth-century film puts The Exorcist into a much larger perspective.

Baker, Robert A. Hidden Memories: Voices and Visions from Within. Buffalo, N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1992.
Call#: Van Pelt Library BF315 .B35 1992

 

Despite William Peter Blatty’s belief of the 1949 exorcism, many skeptics have criticized the legitimacy of demonic possessions and exorcisms. Robert A. Baker seeks to examine imperceptible behavior in his book, looking at alternatives to the religious and paranormal explanations. In Chapter 5, ‘Calling All Corpses or Dial “D” for Dead”, Baker explains the history of known demonic possessions and asserts that they can be easily explained away by mental problems or voluntary acts.

In the 4th century, Zeno of Verona was the first to describe what happens to those who were possessed; by the 16th century, the victim’s behavior had become fairly stereotyped. Among the symptoms were convulsions, increased intelligence with clairvoyance, spontaneous amnesia, and involuntary demonic behavior. After the 17th century, the number of possession victims dropped as mental illnesses became properly diagnosed, primarily with the label of hysteria. Psychiatrists now believe that many of the symptoms actually fall under various psychological disorders, in particular multiple personality disorder.

Demonic possessions were also faked, according to Baker. In 16th and 17th century France, families placed daughters in the convent to avoid the financial burden of a dowry. Being possessed spread among the nuns at this time, who knew how to act and felt it to be a relatively safe way to protest and to escape from their duties. They would become the center of sympathetic attention. Baker believes that the symptoms can be faked. For example, linguists attribute glossolalia, or the speaking in a foreign tongue, to strings of nonsense syllables that, put together haphazardly, sound like word groupings and sentences. Though this story is intriguing, it lacks the credibility to be confirmed. This chapter of Baker’s book presents the views of many historians and professionals that deny the existence of possession, and thus the basis of The Exorcist.

There are many elements of The Exorcist that shock people, one of which is sex, as the dialogue in the movie touches on this theme with extreme vulgarity. In the article titled “The Turn of the Screw and The Exorcist: Demoniacal Possession and Childhood Purity”, Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi, examines the sexual undertones of The Exorcist and maintains that it is a major theme in the story.

Beit-Hallahmi parallels demonic possession with “forbidden aggressive and sexual drives” (296). Through the jokes and perversions, he writes that The Exorcist portrays a distortion of sex, which turns into evil. Essentially, the source of evil is seen outside of one’s self, though the sexual drive arises from within; he argues that we have to protect ourselves from the returning evil, which we must exorcise. And so, he concludes, the major theme in The Exorcist is a protection sexuality projected onto evil.

Regan is the only character that represents good, life and asexuality, while all other characters are mixed. The Demon represents evil, death, sex, and bad religion. Beit-Hallahmi claims that Regan thus serves as a battlefield for good and evil, and that only asexual adults (the priests) are able to save children. He urges the ideal of keeping children pure and innocent by saving them from sexual development. Although Beit-Hallahmi holds an unconventional analysis of the film, it is interesting to understand the vast diversity in opinion that emerged from the film. The vulgar treatment of sexuality is in the movie more for shock value, but according to Beit-Hallahmi, provides a deep meaning and lesson to Blatty’s story.