EXORCIST III
Sometimes, different is...better
I have to wonder what kind of fanfare preceded the arrival of William Peter Blatty's book Legion in 1983. Surely it couldn't have been anything like that which heralded Thomas Harris' Hannibal earlier this year; Hannibal might have had two books - and movies - preceding it, but most people still don't know that Red Dragon or Manhunter has anything to do with Hannibal Lecter. The two situations are so similar that one would think that the hype levels would be comparable, but for the different levels of hyping in 1983 and 1999, and that pesky Exorcist II, which might have its fans but pretty much killed the public's interest for any further Exorcist action.
Blatty was never a particularly prolific author - I only know of five books that he wrote, four of which I have (FINALLY found another copy of Twinkle, Twinkle, "Killer" Kane the other day) (@%$@#% book-stealin' ex-girlfriend). But he made up for it with the fact that they're some damn fine books - much like the case with Harris. Adapting the book for the screenplay and directing it himself, Blatty has given us a truly awesome piece of horror cinema, feeling very different from either of the two movies that preceded it, and coming across better than either. (gasp! Blasphemy! Yeah, that's what I said - this is better than the original.)
This does not attempt to refute the events of the first, poorly-received sequel, the way last year's Halloween sequel did with its own predecessors. Instead, it concentrates on a plot going in an entirely different direction; you didn't really think that demon just died after Father Karras, whom it possessed, took a swan dive down that Georgetown stairway, did you? Regan, schmegan-? I wanna know what happened to the demon!
And thusly, a Razzie-nominated George C. Scott stars, grumbling and muttering his way through his role as Lieutenant Kinderman, a supporting character in the original book and film, then played by Lee J. Cobb. (this is further evidence that whoever's behind the Razzies has no apparent understanding of what makes a movie or a performance bad, let alone good) He's still friends with Father Dyer (here played by Ed Flanders), seeing It's A Wonderful Life with him once a year, each claiming unconvincingly that it's for the benefit of the other. He's investigating a few rather peculiar, religiously-themed decapitations - more peculiar yet when he notes that there are marks on the bodies that distinctly signify the work of Gemini, a serial killer executed fifteen years ago. (no, the public was not informed) The case gets stranger yet when he notes that there's a fella in the local sanitarium, catatonic until recently, claiming to be Gemini and bearing a striking resemblance to one dead-and-buried Father Damien Karras.
What makes Exorcist III so special is established in microcosm in its most famous scene, the legendary "hallway murder" of a young nurse. It's a lengthy sequence, with a mostly stationary camera taking in some very long shots (long in both senses of the term) of the action; it goes on for a while, one wonders what the point is, and it pays off magnificently. This is a movie that richly rewards the patient - sequences like this, lengthy, ponderous looks at the aftermath of murder, and extensive conversations about nothing, and everything.
Blatty's dialogue might seem pretentious or overblown to many; and no, I don't know any people who actually talk this way. I just wish I did. Half the people I run into every day can't string a sentence longer than three words together, no words longer than two syllables, "fuckin'" for every other word and which beer is their favorite being their biggest philosophic concern. I mean, take your pick, guys; this movie gives us "The whole world is a homicide victim, Father. Would a God who is good invent something like death? Plainly speaking, it's a lousy idea. It's not popular, Father, it's not a winner." "There you go, blaming God. "Who should I blame, Phil Rizzuto?" "You wouldn't want to live forever." "Yes I would." "No you wouldn?t. You'd get bored." "I have hobbies. In the meantime, we have cancer, and mongoloid babies, and murderers. Monsters prowling the planet, prowling this neighborhood, Father. Right now. While our children suffer, and our loved ones die, while your God goes waltzing blindly through the universe like some kind of cosmic Billie Burke." "Bill, it all works out right." "When?" "At the end of time." "That soon?" Or, alternately, one's cup of tea might run along the lines of Steve Buscemi convincing somebody of the validity of his ballistic trajectory computations (in his head) by declaring "Because I'm a freakin' genius!". By all means, take your pick.
The acting is heartfelt and convincing all around; Flanders is wonderful as Dyer, producing a foil for Kinderman without once seeming like a "best friend the guy always argues with" construct. It's really rare in the movies to see an honest, intelligent look at a close friendship between two adult men, and it's something to appreciate and treasure when it happens. Jason Miller returns (with little actual acting time) as Karras, and there are too many smile-inducing minor and trivial characters to list off. (watch also for cameos by Fabio, Larry King, Samuel L. Jackson, Patrick Ewing, and "For all the latest medical poop, call Surgeon General" C. Everett Koop) Astoundingly good is Brad Dourif as Gemini; terrifying in his violent moments ("He's inside with us!!! He'll never get away!!! HIS PAIN WON'T END!!!"), somehow moreso in his quiet ones ("Just friends. Old friends.").
Much of the credit for the acting has to be shared by Blatty, who lets all his actors take their time with their roles, letting the camera linger on them as long as they need it to. Sound is used startlingly well, with whispers, rumbles and roars at all the right spots. This is a movie to be seen with a great sound system. He also gives us a number of striking images - of Heaven (at once cheesily traditional and very strange), of Hell (lots of fire and snakes), of helicopters chopping their way along above the Potomac. (uh, it is the Potomac, right?) Jeez, two movies this guy's done, both of them stunning, the kind of things even "the great" directors would be proud to have on their list of accomplishments. People make movies their whole lives and don't make movies half as good as these, let alone at a 100% success rate. Where does this guy hide?
The only serious problem this movie (other than that nobody seems to notice this missing Jesus head in the hospital, and the fate of Brother Fain isn't revealed like it is in the novel) isn't as bad as it could have been. I've never really gotten the story straight on just what happened to the ending here, what the ending was that was written and filmed - but some high-up said that you couldn't make a movie with "Exorcist" in its title without an actual exorcism. Not a bad point, really - without an exorcism, the critics would have jumped all over that. Which is why it should have kept the title Legion - eventually bringing in a respectable but very modest take, I don't see the movie losing much profit by failing to mention its sequel nature in the very title. (why not just the ad campaign?)
This ending, which feels a little tacked-on, makes necessary the dispensing of a major theme of the book; that is, diametric duality. No big loss to the film itself. Yeah, I don't know how Father Morning gets into that maximum-security psycho ward, but Nicol Williamson has a great voice for exorcising, and the scene gives us some really terrific visuals and Scott's awesome "I believe!" rant. It gets harder to stomach when one looks at it too closely - on closer examination, the parts with Williamson were clearly added in later; he's never shown on-screen with Scott, and the shots with Scott that depend on Williamson's presence (you might say that Father Morning left his mark) are very brief, taken from quite a distance and almost certainly with a double in Scott's place. So, my advice: don't look at the ending too closely. Yeah, I know - too late, I did it for you. I'm ashamed of myself.
Exorcist III closes off with a shot of two men standing over Father Karras' open grave, never making clear whether this is a burial or an exhumation; it's a safe bet that both need to be done. It's another example of the quiet excellence that goes into this movie; there's more here than initially meets the eye, if you're willing to look, or wait, for it.
A really splendid movie that always reminds me of just how good movies can be, even when they're flawed. Every time I watch it, I just want to watch it again once it's over. Jesus. Two movies. Jim Wynorski puts out five a year, and since 1980 we've got two from William Peter Blatty. It doesn't sound fair. But it's a damn sight better than no Blatty at all.
(irrelevant trivia: my favorite Slayer song, Gemini, is based either on this film or on Legion)