0 documentaries to see before you die
08-12-2018, 07:06 AM
Quote: (07-25-2018 01:18 PM)debeguiled Wrote:
So what if the director of The Exorcist went to Italy to witness an actual exorcism by the official exorcist of Rome?
Have you watched this? What did you think?
I liked the premise and decided to watch it. I was initially surprised by the low reviews on IMDB. "Well, Ringo, whatever, many movies you like have poor ratings", I thought to myself. Until I sat down and watched it...
Terrible, absolutely terrible. I don't even know where to begin.
His access to Amorth and the exorcism are incredible - I'll give him that.
The production value was low. As long as it's a good narrative, it's fine. Tons of Youtubers make amazing shit on a low budget.
Aesthetically, nothing matched. Some shots were good, others terrible (apparently he mixed pro camera, small DSLR/mirrorless camera, GoPro and iPhone footage). Composition and lighting were all over the place. In general it looks very antiquated.
The way Friedkin narrates it makes it look so much like a mystery TV show that at times I wondered if I was watching a real doc or a mockumentary. His interview style and his questions rubbed me the wrong way too. In my opinion the movie would have done better if he had less screen time.
In the beggining, why show all of that stuff about Georgetown? Could have made it much shorter.
The "experts" are a bunch of doctors, a bishop, a writer. I would have cut out all the doctors - they mostly shared the same views. They make a few claims but the film doesn't let it go deeper. The writer and the bishop were interesting, but lacked more context (especially the writer). Also, the band aids on one of the doctors' face were so distracting - yet they were never addressed!
The exorcism itself: nice images, but what's up with that voice?
Friedkin swears he didn't use any effects on it.
Quote:Quote:
And that inhuman wail, that was truly the sound of her voice?
Totally.
There was no manipulation in postproduction at all?
I wouldn’t fuck around with that! That’s ridiculous!
I too was open-minded going into it, but whatever voice that is coming out of her during the exorcism — it’s too bizarre not to ask about.
It was to me, too!
My brain was just not accepting it as I watched.
Well, you’re a skeptic.
I’m not, though. I think it’s a self-defense mechanism to reject something horrifying like that.
Do you think I would put this thing on if — why do such a thing if it didn’t come across to me as something absolutely real?
So you think it wasn’t human?
It’s not her. I won’t say it’s not human. It wasn’t her.
In that same interview, Friedkin says he had no intention of making the film or distributing it. "I thought, “I’m doing this because I can with my own camera on my own nickel.” I didn’t know what I would ever do with it, if anything", he says. That's the only possible explanation for this trash.
The ending... bro... that ending... no words.
WNWA (Would Not Watch Again)