The Exorcist - Special Widescreen Edition Box Set

When this movie was originally released in 1973, Billy Graham warned it contained "real evil." Perhaps he's right.

This ultimate horror spectacle terrified and fascinated an international audience of many cultures and languages with its truly shocking depiction of innocent, cherubic Linda Blair's transformation into a vile, pathetic vessel of Satanic possession. William Peter Blatty scripted from his best selling novel which was allegedly based on a real case of possession. The original DVD release included a fascinating "making of" documentary that reveals director William Friedkin as an arrogant bully who had no qualms about physically abusing his actors in an attempt to get a desired reaction on camera.

This new version is a cut based in part on author Blatty's restoring of deleted material from Friedkin's first cut and includes about ten minutes of new and extended scenes, the most shocking of which is Blair's infamous "spider walk" down the stairs.

The informative conversation with Blatty and director Friedkin are not included on this version, but there's an exceedingly strange commentary track by Friedkin that's kind of like a description for the blind of what's on the screen. There's hardly a word about the directing process, the subliminal shots, the brilliant sound design, behind the scenes events or even the spectacular effects. One gets the notion that Friedkin pretty much made this film by himself.

Friedkin makes a whopping mistake when, in describing the terrific opening scenes shot in northern Iraq near the ruins of ancient Ninevah, he recalls the Biblical story of Joshua bringing down its fabled walls. Ooops, Joshua battled Jericho! It's Jonah, who is said to be buried in nearby Mosul (where they also shot atmospheric, underground bazaar scenes), who had something to do with Ninevah.

The great underpinnings of this story revolve around the resurrection, as it were, of the actual middle eastern demon idol Pazuzu from a place of renown evil by a priest-archaeologist (Max Von Sydow) who has to eventually confront it again in a final showdown half a world away. There is no why to all this, because that's what makes evil, evil; it's irrational.

That said, this remains the most frightening of all mainstream films and it still delivers the horrors that generate nightmares. Perhaps that's because when it's over, there remains the unsettling feeling that the demon wins the battle. That fear conquers all. Perhaps the devil's greatest lie.


Disappointing re-release. "D-" at best.   December 28, 1998
kissconte@aol.com (New York)
21 out of 28 found this review helpful

Being an Exorcist fan for over 20 years, I had waited anxiously for The Exorcist 25th Anniversary Edition. Unfortunately upon watching the tape, I found myself angered that Warner Home Video didn't care enough to place a knowledgable team who completely knows this film in charge of the video's production.

First of all, the "3 original trailers" boasted on the video's packaging is incorrect. The very first trailer (which yours truly saw in 1973) isn't on the tape! Furthermore, one of two (yes "two" not "three") trailers is actually a trailer from the 1978/79 rerelease! Additionally, there were television spots from 1973/74 which were different than the theatre trailers that Warner could have used (I suspect they don't even know these TV spots exist), but did not.

Secondly, when the film was rereleased in 1978/79 (I saw this rerelease the day Dawn of the Dead was also released) it deleted what I feel to be a crucial few seconds from the movie: the scene after Father Merrin exits the cab and looks upon the house with light shimmering from Regan's bedroom, you see the posessed girl's face morph into a chalk-white vision seen only in Damian Karras' dream earlier in the film. Originally, this face contorted and showed the gastly vision for quite a few moments. In the rerelease, the film cuts this scene down to just a brief transformation before it quickly cuts into the next scene where Mrs. Macneil opens the door for Merrin.

Perhaps the only positive aspect about this video is the BBC "Making of" documentary. Although quick and concise, it doesn't go into specific detail on aspects like Lee J. Cobb's death, other unused footage of background characters (servants Karl and his wife had a drug addicted daughter in the novel; supposedly some of this was filmed), and other tidbits for those who want to know all-things-Exorcist.

Sadly,Warner even replaced the film's original, black-and-red opening "Warner Communications Company" introduction to its new "Warner Home Video 75th Anniversary" design, robbing the initial sinister mood the original credits had created.

Anyway, watching this as a regular movie is fine. But to people who are genuine Exorcist collectors, it is a disappointing effort.


FOR THE DIEHARD FAN ONLY   March 1, 2006
P. D. Clarke (Denver, Colorado)
21 out of 21 found this review helpful

In the first few years after the 1973 premiere of "The Exorcist," a slew of articles and books were released discussing not only the film but the brouhaha that followed its release. Few movies had resulted in such a heated cultural debate and reaction. Director William Friedkin, and producer William Peter Blatty, writer of the novel on which the film was based, and also its screenwriter, were interviewed extensively, in endless discussion over how the movie was made and how the final version of the screenplay was drafted. For his part, Blatty never uttered a single word of dissatisfaction with the final result that hit theatre screens.

Fast-forward some twenty years. Mr. Blatty began to publicly grumble about some scenes that had been filmed but left out of the final cut. Friedkin, contradicting what had already been made known in all those books and articles back in the Seventies, vehemently denied that any such scenes ever existed, standing firm that his final cut was perfect and complete.

It looked as though a rift developed between the two, and Blatty announced plans to produce a mini-series version for Fox Television, intent upon transferring the whole of his novel to film. That never came to pass, and how could it have, given the profane nature of some major plot-points, and the language? Even Fox Television was not up to it.

Just as press notices about the mini-series died away, plans for the twenty-fifth anniversary edition of the DVD were made known. Suddenly, those scenes Friedkin had denied ever existed, mysteriously had been found.

Some of those scenes made it onto the Anniversary Edition, in the excellent attached documentary made for British television by Mark Kermode.

Warner Brothers bean counters began to pay attention to all this fuss and money was authorized to dust-off the "discovered footage," to see if any more profit could be squeezed from the movie, which had already enjoyed several successful theatrical re-releases around the world.

The result is "The Exorcist: The Version You've Never Seen." Shoe-horned into the movie are scenes that Friedkin had previously acknowledged existed, but had left out in 1973, because he said they slowed down the pacing. Also included are the scenes Friedkin had denied ever existed. This "unseen version" is not only a misnomer, it is only for the diehard fan. Compared to the original version, it is a curiosity piece. Some of the previously rejected scenes simply do not work. The so-called "spider walk," in which the possessed girl scrambles down the stairs in an inverted bridge position, clearly suspended by piano wires, looks inane, especially when blood inexplicably gushes from her mouth. A first visit to the doctor is well done, but the costuming and art direction are so dated, so hideously 1970s, they are humorously distracting.

Some of the resurrected scenes are effective, notably the ones Friedkin lied about. When the elderly Father Merrin explains why he thinks demons possess people, the movie makes more sense than it ever did before. It is an uplifting and illuminating moment, and it is very interesting that Friedkin lied about the scene's existence, although at one time he was quoted as saying it was like "stopping for a commercial."

The worst aspect of this version is Friedkin's unthinkable tinkering with the music soundtrack and some of the visuals. Superimposed over dark spots on the screen are images of "scary" faces and the statue of the demon "Pazuzu," with corny accompanying music, the sort that is usually saved for TV films about women in jeopardy. Ghastly. Because of some quick cuts of a white demonic face, that some slow-witted critics labeled "subliminal" in 1973, it appears Friedkin consciously tried to repeat the so-called "subliminal" effect for contemporary audiences, attempting to scare with nonsensical images superimposed on kitchen appliances and dark corners. The images do not register as subliminal in the least, they aren't even scary, they just look cheap, like scrapbook collages. Heavy-handed music is tossed into other scenes that had previously been quietly dramatic without it.

This is not the first time Friedkin toyed with the original version of "The Exorcist." In 1980, a 70mm, six-track stereophonic version was produced for re-release. While the visuals were left alone, the soundtrack was vamped-up and altered in places, in ways that did not particularly enhance the action or improve the film. Not all prints were struck in 70mm, and the 35mm prints for that reissue contained only four-track sound. Ads at the time urged audiences to "Hear the Devil for the first time in Stereo!" Since the final product was so similar to the 1973 version, it seemed like a vanity project.

If there is one version for the average collector to own, it is the 25th Anniversary Edition. If there simply is not enough of "The Exorcist" to be had, this version is of special interest to the collector. It is not a vanity project. It is an actual re-cutting of a classic American movie. For the diehard fan, at least watching it once is necessary. One can only hope that this version does not become the definitive one because it is inferior to the original.



A psychological scarefest!   July 16, 2001
D. Litton (Wilmington, NC)
20 out of 23 found this review helpful

To call "The Exorcist" a horror film is a drastic understatement, selling it short on the actual purpose of its story about a young girl possessed by a demonic presence. It is a shocking movie in terms of content and certain physical attributes, but the real story that lies within the material is something much stronger than a simple tale of exorcism. It's a mind-opening film experience as much as it is an eye-opening one.

In close collaboration with screenwriter William Peter Blatty, the author of the famed novel on which the movie is based, director William Friedkin brings to life the story of the lives of Chris Macneil (Ellen Burstyn) and her daughter, Regan (Linda Blair), who live in Georgetown. Chris is an actress, not completely well-known, but enough to throw expensive parties and afford some help around the house.

All seems well until Regan begins acting out of the ordinary, behaving in ways that graduate from simple to outright shocking. Her bed rocks violently in the night; her attitude towards others becomes increasingly temperamental; her skin becomes placid and breaks out into legions, and things ranging from violent convulsions to masturbating with a crucifix push Chris over the top, causing her to enlist the help of Damien Karras, who is haunted by the memories of his mother, with whom we see him interacting in the beginning third of the film.

It is at this point that the movie's true horror begins. The realization comes across Karras that in order to cleanse the young girl, an exorcism must be performed. Heading the ritual is Father Merrin (Max Von Sydow), who warns Karras of the psychological games played by the devil. The final act is a tour de force of horror at its most involving, as the devil possessing Regan becomes increasingly agitated by the ritual.

As I have previously stated, "The Exorcist" is not a horror movie in the traditional sense. I watched the film hoping for something that would cause me to jump out of my seat, but what I found was something much more horrific and, at the same time, completely engrossing. The devil is portrayed as a relentless force of evil, and is everything we've ever been brought up to believe about him. He lies, and most importantly, he plays games of the mind by using Karras's mother as a ploy to make him weak. To watch the way in which Karras must resist these lies is compelling and masterful.

And even the physical elements of horror are some of the most shocking cinematic moments ever. The crucifix masturbation scene is very disturbing and graphic, while the slow digression of Regan's appearance from a cheery little girl to a hideously deformed creature is slowly chilling. And those pea soup rumors you've been hearing... they're some of the biggest gross out moments in any movie.

The movie is also not without its share of brilliant casting, boasting some stunning performances from Max von Sydow and Ellen Burstyn. Von Sydow gives Merrin's character a stable and forceful demeanor, while Burstyn's Chris Macneil is emotional while never becoming too whiny. she is able to sell us on her character's fear for her daughter's life. Linda Blair, in one of the most challenging roles in history, perfectly segues from cheery to eerie, with help of a little make-up, of course.

If you were able to connect more with "The Silence of the Lambs" than "I Know What You Did Last Summer," then this is the movie for you. It is a psychological journey that is religiously truthful and revealing, while also dotting itself with small physical horror elements and twists. You can't really ask for a better scare or shock than this.


The Exorcist   February 16, 2000
Malcolm Lawrence (Seattle)
17 out of 20 found this review helpful

I've never really been much of a fan of horror films because I've never been able to suspend my belief long enough to let a monster scare me. To me psychological demons are much more effective than overdone makeup jobs. I prefer The Haunting with Claire Bloom, or The Shining with Jack Nicholson. But the all-time classic has got to be The Exorcist. One of the reasons The Exorcist always scares the bejesus out of me is because it treats an epistemological subject very seriously, even when the one character you'd expect to step forth willingly, young priest Father Karras (Jason Miller), does his best to dissuade Ellen Burstyn that her daughter is possessed by a demon. Of course, by that time Karras has already confessed to a fellow priest that he's started to lose his own faith because he realizes that the problems he has to deal with of his congregation are too much for one man, especially a man who keeps neglecting his own mother during the last days of her life.

I think one of the reasons this is such a successful film is that the concept of a demon is treated as intangibly as our imagination's reach: How WOULD the devil deal with us if confronted? By reading each of our souls, finding whatever carefully hidden secrets there are and spewing them back in our faces as spiritual ammunition. Not only that, but when you see Regan (Linda Blair) in the opening scenes gently horseplaying around with her mother and her sister, the charm and goodness she radiates leaves you completely floored when she finally does become possessed and turns into a creature so horrible that you forget all about Regan. The lynchpin is having Max von Sydow cast as the aging priest who comes to finish off the work that Father Karras has started. Von Sydow who has been Ingmar Bergman's spiritual warrior for so many of his films dealing with the epistemological nature of the universe. And credit must go to Mercedes McCambridge for supplying the voice of the demon.

I think The Exorcist is one of the best "lit" and photographed films of all time. The use of shadow is brilliant; very low key (simple things like showing a lit hall, yet having the far stairway at the END of the hall not lit...very subtly eerie stuff) yet incredibly evocative. I mean, the shadows damn near have colors. Director of Photography Owen Roizman, whose work can be seen in "The Addams Family" and "Grand Canyon," shot "The Exorcist." Roizman's credits include such famous titles as "The French Connection," "Network," "Tootsie," "Three Days of the Condor," "The Electric Horseman" and "Havana." In a movie that took 180 days to make (three times the average), the exorcism alone took three months-and on some of those days the crew felt lucky to get one shot. That was because director William Friedkin wanted to make it visually clear that the satanic spirit inside the possessed girl had made the room unbearably cold. A refrigerated set representing her bedroom was constructed on a sound stage, and air conditioners worked all night to lower its temperature to 40 degrees below zero. "When we set up the lights in the morning, that would raise the temperature to around zero, which was necessary if we were going to be able to see the frost on the actor's breath," Roizman explained. "We also kept the humidity very high. It was an unbelievably uncomfortable way to work."

Look closely using stop-action laserdisc to reveal the flash-frames of Satan's face, which Friedkin inserted almost subliminally at two places, and to reveal a subtle double-exposure in which the evil spirit seems to peer out through Blair's eyes. There are semi-subliminal single-frame shots in this film: when the priest is dreaming of his mother coming up out of the subway, there is a single frame shot of a face (Eileen Dietz), painted black and white, grimacing. There are two other places where this image is supposedly displayed: when Regan, lying on the bed, turns to look at Father Merrin and Father Karras, and just after the head-turning scene. Do not watch this alone.