Editorials
[Special Feature] Toto Watches… ‘The Exorcist’!!!
Toto Miranda is new to horror.
Or, at least horror as you and I know it. He’s a film buff (and musician – as a member of The Octopus Project he’s one of the loudest drummers on the planet) and has a huge amount of respect for the horror genre, but is just now getting around to seeing a few movies that some of us less-well-adjusted folks call “classics”.
Remember the thrill you got when you first realized you were a true horror fan? Remember the excitement of realizing just how many awesome movies you hadn’t seen yet? We’re hoping to recapture some of that excitement through Toto’s eyes as he watches some of our favorite horror movies for the very first time.
Head inside to check out his thoughts on William Friedkin’s The Exorcist! Just in time for Killer Joe hitting today!

I’m not sure how I’d managed not to have seen The Exorcist prior to this. So when the chance to write this piece coincided with a screening at a historic theater (Austin’s Paramount) it seemed like the perfect time to take the plunge. Guess what, it was great. Even with the movie’s reputation loudly preceding it, all my expectations were surpassed. It’s the definition of horror (or at least a definition), but also so much more than that – just a f*cking awesome movie. Such a powerful mix of visceral scares, straight-up shocking material, and an overall sense of fear and dread that comes from some of the biggest underlying themes you could ask for.
I will say that I wasn’t sure how intense a nearly 40-year-old movie could be. Suffice it to say pretty intense. Actually that won’t suffice, let’s discuss. The things they had that kid say! About that man’s mother! The visual effects match the intensity of the demon’s dialogue – raw and powerfully effective. The self-mutilation (to leave it at that) with the crucifix is so vicious I could barely believe it was happening. It felt extreme even from a 2012 perspective to have a (possessed) child say and do the things she does, making total sense that people flipped out over it in 1973. I wouldn’t call it gratuitous, though – it raises the emotional stakes in an unequivocal way that feels like the bottom dropping out of the characters’ world. However graphic things become, the movie never lingers, only giving you enough to think “wait, what?!” before moving on.
The movie I saw, I have since discovered, was the 2000 “Version You’ve Never Seen.” Researching the differences on iMDb’s alternate versions page, I was a little relieved to discover that the “subliminal” demon-face flashes were a new addition, which felt like one of the very few missteps in the otherwise stunning visual effects. If that was the price to pay for the spider-walk scene I’ll take the trade – that sh*t blew my mind. Still, I’m excited to watch the original version and see how that feels.

The story initially places us on the side of the skeptics – the arguments over whether or not Regan is truly possessed are surprisingly gripping for a movie whose subsequent possession scenes are so famous. I love that it follows the characters through increasingly severe explanations for the girl’s behavior until it gets all the way to actually being a Satan vs. God situation, which seems about as far as one can go. At some point in this escalation the movie becomes a little like a police procedural, only set in a world where the authorities are dealing with souls rather than criminals. This is where the non-fiction elements of the story’s setting get really interesting – the actual Catholic Church has actual rites for dealing with actual demons, which is just too fascinating for me to adequately express. Even if this is a kind of sensationalized churchsploitation, using these real settings to tell a supernatural story proves to be a powerful device, really bringing the demon into our world just as it comes into the world of the characters. (Yes, maybe I did write an almost identical sentence about [REC] last time – juxtaposing the real and the fantastic is just something I love about movies. And in my guise as genre outsider, I think an element of realism is my main entry point for a horror movie. Or so I am discovering.)
Any really effective movie makes itself open to interpretation, thematically, and it would seem that a really effective horror movie is asking what you’re really afraid of beyond whatever is being perpetrated on screen. Not that The Exorcist of all movies lacks in the impact of its primary events, but I think it has stuck with me because of all the other things it suggests. Making the central conflict as top-level as it can be (spiritual) really leaves a lot of room for reading-in: it could be science vs. spirituality, faith vs. skepticism, ancient vs. modern…looking around the Internet while writing this I found some perspectives in which the possessed Regan represents the demonization (quite literally) of female sexuality. The movie is way too godd*mn scary to consider any of this openness while you’re watching it, but the feeling it left me with was less of a check-the-basement fear and more, I dunno, existential dread? I didn’t feel much relief that Regan had been freed of the demon, but was thinking instead of Father Karras, whose reward for struggling with his faith was being tossed out a window. He is the title character after all, or at least he could be, and the structure he stood for had been overwhelmed by a malicious chaos. Kind of a downer, but I guess they call that tragedy.
So, to sum up – the movie absolutely freaked me out from inside my brain, and I had to go home and watch Adventure Time for a while to calm down. Crazy film. Eight stars!
Editorials
Forgotten ’80s Satanic Panic Horror Gem ‘The Kiss’ Is Worth Rediscovering
Horror was thriving so well in the 1980s that movies like Pen Densham’s The Kiss (1988) would understandably get lost in the shuffle, only to then gain their fans later on in life. Even still, this one Canadian-American curio has had a more challenging time than others, as far as contemporary reevaluations go, which is very likely due to the movie’s limited availability—at least as of this write-up.
However, the scarceness of The Kiss, while a bit annoying, makes it like catnip for ‘80s horror completists everywhere. Hopefully, a lot of them will walk away satisfied after watching this hidden gem.
Even though The Kiss was intended as the first of several horror collaborations between Astral Pictures and TriStar, as well as the first feature produced by Densham, Richard B. Lewis and John Watson’s Trilogy Entertainment Group, it ended up being the only one produced from that former union. Once the movie was released, TriStar’s distribution jitters—they opted for a regional rollout—did the $6-million flick no favors. TriStar’s cold feet toward horror releases have been well noted, but The Kiss still did a tad better than Night of the Creeps (1986), another genre outing that flopped due to its regional opening.
Shot in Montreal, but set in Albany, New York, The Kiss—which was still called The Host just a few months before its October premiere—concerns an average middle-class family and their forthcoming situation. The uncanny problem in store for them was, in fact, set in motion some years earlier. As that hot and dusty flashback to the Belgian Congo shows, a familial curse was set upon the two Dunbar sisters well before Meredith Salenger’s teenage character was born.

Meredith Salenger, Nicholas Kilbertus and Mimi Kuzyk in The Kiss
The Kiss, which was based on a story by co-writer Stephen Volk (Ghostwatch) and penned by both Volk and Tom Ropelewski, has the outward appearance of The Stepfather (1987). This movie, though, is anything but a gender-flipped retread of that classic domestic disturber. For starters, The Kiss is far less grounded in reality—that much is clear from its unsettling opening scene. There, a trusting girl (Priscilla Mouzakiotis) is the victim of her own deceptive aunt (Céline Lomez); the movie’s titular act, and the story’s first shock, becomes the means of transferring an ancient evil from one host to another.
In the present day, Salenger’s role of Amy Halloran, a religious schoolgirl, is dealt a harsh blow in life once her mother, Hilary Halloran née Dunbar (Pamela Collyer), suddenly dies in a freak accident. But rather than a complete stranger sweeping the Halloran widower (Nicholas Kilbertus) off his feet some months later, Joanna Pacula’s character is that chosen temptress. Here, Pacula plays the grown-up version of the afflicted girl last seen in the movie’s opener. Since Amy’s mother is insistent about there being no reunion between estranged sisters, and she even contemplates buying a gun shortly before her tragic demise, it’s presumable that Aunt Felice poses a threat to her family.
The Kiss isn’t a movie ever too concerned about its own predictability. The audience is indeed often one step ahead of the story here, but also keep in mind how every one of those steps is loud. Take, for instance, the death of Amy’s mother; the Halloran matriarch goes out in garish, gruesome fashion, as a supernaturally commandeered truck sends Collyer’s character through a store window first, then leaves her one leg short. The directorial enthusiasm truly comes out in horrific moments such as these.
The Kiss is always sure to revel in its characters’ ills and misfortunes. So if the plot doesn’t impress, then its lurid parts should. Amy’s mother’s exit scene was proof of an eager, first-time horror director proving his worth. Then, bestie Heather (Sabrina Boudot) survives to tell the tale of a bizarre escalator mishap that, despite showing relatively less gore, spikes viewers’ empathy meter. The wilder bits of this movie, however, commence with that inevitable hookup between Felice and Amy’s bewitched father; their kitchen coitus is paralleled by Amy’s feverish classroom terror. The outcome there is a disquieting cross-cut of sex magic and a young woman’s menstrual onset plus hallucinations.

Sabrina Boudot in The Kiss
From foam appliances to bladders, that parade of special effects in The Kiss casts its own spell on the audience. Felice’s familiar, a visibly malevolent cat, was realized here with several models, some more articulate than others. Admittedly, the demon cat’s not as convincing as most of the effects here, but accepting that artifice, as opposed to fighting it, will make the whole experience way more enjoyable. As for the makeup used to manifest Felice’s inner villainy, it is more minimal and subtle than one might like; yet the work done to turn Pacula into an antithesis of herself is nonetheless compelling.
The otherworldly perils and dreadful goings-on wouldn’t work half as well as they do in The Kiss without the story’s contrast effect. Finding frights in picturesque, extremely ordinary settings was something that took off in the ‘80s, thanks to that sweeping shift to locales like the suburbs. And Amy’s home, a replica of a real Montreal suburban house, is the ideal battleground for any proper good-versus-evil story. It’s also prime real estate for this movie’s satanic panic-inspired horrors.
Because of their ostensibly similar plots, The Kiss has been compared to The Exorcist (1973). Except in Densham’s movie, the sinister, non-Christian entity targeting a teen girl lies within something less apparent and, perhaps, more devastating upon its exposure. To an outsider, Pacula’s Aunt Felice is too beautiful and unobjectionable to ever suspect of being a monster. More suspicious is how quickly she rips into the fabric of the Halloran home. Felice’s mere presence upsets the “texture of family life,” according to the director.

The demon cat in The Kiss
Taking out Amy’s mother and best friend, and distracting her father, would suggest The Kiss is playing by a different set of rules. It is initially leaving its adolescent target unsupported in a rather grim scenario. In contrast, though, this story offers up a surrogate parent who does her best to fill in the holes of Amy’s eroding home life. Mimi Kuzyk does good work as that family friend and doctor, Brenda, who guides the lost child without also steering her in any one direction; she is naturally skeptical of Amy’s accusations until it’s almost too late to do anything about them. So although The Kiss does an admirable job of undoing the main character’s support system, it never leaves her without a lifeline. This dark movie, in spite of everything that’s transpired, doesn’t deprive itself of light and hope.
The Kiss is a potent mélange of familiar ideas. If not for the director’s surprise flair for horror, though, the movie would have been less effective. What a shame that Pen Densham didn’t continue with the genre. As for Joanna Pacula, she is, too, owed credit as the wicked vixen opposite Meredith Salenger’s pitiable Amy; she never fails to be unsettling in her role. Pacula makes Aunt Felice a sexy yet intimidating character.
For horror that steadily doles out madness and menace, while also delivering a flashy and ghastly conclusion, The Kiss is certain to please. Yes, it’s cheesy all the way, but most favorably, everyone involved plays everything straight. That kind of commitment goes a long way with this movie.

The Kiss
You must be logged in to post a comment.