The Exorcist Ages Very Poorly

One night, when I was very little, I saw my parents watching TV. I don’t remember what it was about it, but something about what they were watching caught my interest so I asked if I could watch with them. My mom then told me, “Oh no, Sean, we’re watching The Exorcist; it’s too scary for you,” then sent me back to my room.

For many years following, I desperately wanted to know what was so bad about this “Exorcist” movie from the early 70s. In October, because of the release of a new film in the franchise and its 50th anniversary, The Exorcist was being shown in theaters again. My family thought it would be a perfect way to kick off a month where we’d be watching many horror movies. Excited and full of anticipation, we went.  

After it was over, as my family was in shock and terror, I proudly announced to them that it was… pretty boring. 

The Exorcist may be extremely influential, and I appreciate it for that, but for the most part, it does not stand the test of time. First off, let’s talk about it being boring. The pacing is incredibly 70s.:very slow. And it takes a while for anything to really happen. Just to be clear: I don’t have a problem with slow cinema. Plenty of my favorite films are very slow movies (2001: A Space Odyssey, Stalker, The Lighthouse, Midsommar, Rashomon, etc.) It’s just that these films tell stories that could only be told at a slow pace, and the thing about The Exorcist is we don’t need to spend this much time with these characters to understand them because there isn’t that much that the film needs to tell us about them for this story to work and what it did need to tell could’ve been told in a much more interesting and quick way. Also, since it’s a horror movie that mostly consists of mostly just people talking, it would help the pace if they shot it in a way that makes even the scenes where nothing is happening feel unnerving and disturbing. 

Something that I think made this film much more disturbing in 1973 is back then, you usually wouldn’t see these kinds of things in film. For example, the “F-word” wasn’t used in film until 3 years prior. So that already would’ve been a really big deal in 1973, but hearing a child of all people saying it about Jesus must’ve been even worse. Nowadays, you can say practically anything you want in a movie, so it’s not as shocking. I can also imagine this movie being terrifying for people living in extremely religious households, which are becoming much less common.

Something else that ages like milk is most of the visual effects. Regan’s head turning around just looks ridiculous now, but it’s not nearly as funny as her crab walking down the stairs. However, keep in mind that I said “most.” The make-up job on Regan is one of the best ever and the voice-over is great. 
So yeah, The Exorcist is an underwhelming film that shows its age. Even though I’ve spent most of this article slandering it, I still respect the film because it’s insanely influential, and many movies I love (though probably even more that I hate) wouldn’t exist without it, so I can see why it deserves its “classic” reputation. Though I still think it isn’t nearly as good now as it probably was in 1973.