Friedkin may be pompous, but The French Connection, The Exorcist, Sorcerer, and To Live and Die in LA are each in my top 100 movies of all time — with TFC and The Exorcist — depending on my mood — anywhere from 1-15.
Blatty’s DNA is so deep inside Friedkin’s The Exorcist that it needed a cigarette after it was complete. True, the two fought over some of what was implied vs what was overtly said, but the message of the film was one of hope, I’d argue.
As for the characters, I don’t find any of them — down to the doctors and the lab tech who may have been the garbage bag killer who was the inspiration for Cruising — wooden or uninteresting. In fact, they’re really quite layered. Even Regan, in the extended version, is quite complex. The performances are uniformly great: Lee J Cobb is perfect; Jason Miller provides just the right secular-Catholic friction you’d expect from the early 70s, when the counterculture met the religious patriarchy. Max von Sydow and Ellen Burstyn both gave Oscar-worthy performances. And as big of a fan as I am of The Sting, the Exorcist was in my opinion the Best Picture that year.
Friedkin’s almost clinical style — a product of his pedigree as a documentarian — turned what could have been an absurd premise into one that audiences believed.
No. Nope. Can’t stand with you on this one. Friedkin was a prick who used guerrilla tactics to get the shots he wanted. But to his credit, they almost always worked.
A classic film — and one that stuck its eye into the humanist movement and examined the travails and mysteries of having faith.
I'm opposed to Friedkin's style on principle, and I think these sorts of films are overvalued to the extent that there doesn't exist a Romantic alternative in our (intellectual) culture.
The French Connection is best in its class. I will refrain from rude comment on the rest of his oeuvre...
No. Nope. No.
Friedkin may be pompous, but The French Connection, The Exorcist, Sorcerer, and To Live and Die in LA are each in my top 100 movies of all time — with TFC and The Exorcist — depending on my mood — anywhere from 1-15.
Blatty’s DNA is so deep inside Friedkin’s The Exorcist that it needed a cigarette after it was complete. True, the two fought over some of what was implied vs what was overtly said, but the message of the film was one of hope, I’d argue.
As for the characters, I don’t find any of them — down to the doctors and the lab tech who may have been the garbage bag killer who was the inspiration for Cruising — wooden or uninteresting. In fact, they’re really quite layered. Even Regan, in the extended version, is quite complex. The performances are uniformly great: Lee J Cobb is perfect; Jason Miller provides just the right secular-Catholic friction you’d expect from the early 70s, when the counterculture met the religious patriarchy. Max von Sydow and Ellen Burstyn both gave Oscar-worthy performances. And as big of a fan as I am of The Sting, the Exorcist was in my opinion the Best Picture that year.
Friedkin’s almost clinical style — a product of his pedigree as a documentarian — turned what could have been an absurd premise into one that audiences believed.
No. Nope. Can’t stand with you on this one. Friedkin was a prick who used guerrilla tactics to get the shots he wanted. But to his credit, they almost always worked.
A classic film — and one that stuck its eye into the humanist movement and examined the travails and mysteries of having faith.
I'm opposed to Friedkin's style on principle, and I think these sorts of films are overvalued to the extent that there doesn't exist a Romantic alternative in our (intellectual) culture.
The French Connection is best in its class. I will refrain from rude comment on the rest of his oeuvre...
You are incorrect. The movie did not "spice up" the story. The crucifix masturbation scene is in the novel, as is the use of the word "cunt."