Editorials
Special Feature: Exorcism: An Overview Part 2
In Part 2 of our series on exorcisms – in anticipation of Warner Bros.’ The Rite, releasing January 28th – B-D reporter Chris Eggertsen briefly discusses how a Roman Catholic exorcism is performed, what the standards are for determining demonic possession, and the ways in which the practice endures even in modern times. Just make sure not to try this at home – these acts are to be performed by seasoned exorcists only and not attempted on younger siblings or crotchety old relatives.
Also Read: Exorcism: An Overview Part 1
Its cinematic interpretations aside, however, what is an exorcism ritual really like? While with the advent of modern medical and psychiatric theory the practice is far less utilized than it was previously, it is still (controversially) sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church by being included in the Rituale Romanum, one of the official “handbooks” followed by priests when performing rites. Indeed, every Catholic Diocese around the world technically has a priest specifically designated to perform the rite of exorcism on persons who meet the standards outlined for possession.
Determining whether or not to go forth with the exorcism of a disturbed individual is a process that in modern-day Catholicism includes evaluation by medical and psychiatric professionals to see whether the symptoms of disturbance can be attributed to either mental illness or undiagnosed physical problems. If these possibilities (not to mention the possibility of outright fraud) are fully or at least partially ruled out, a Church-sanctioned priest can then theoretically be cleared to perform the exorcism rites. Some of the more surefire symptoms of demonic possession, as outlined by the Catholic Church, include:
1) Knowledge of future events or obscure concepts the allegedly possessed person couldn’t have possibly known about;
2) Speaking in languages either unknown to the person or so arcane as to have fallen out of use in the modern world;
3) Physical feats outside the realm of possibility given the person’s physical size and/or abilities; and
4) A physical aversion to sacred objects.
Interestingly, while most people associate the word “exorcism” with demonic possession, this is not the only reason an exorcism is performed; there are actually three different categories of exorcism that are utilized for different purposes. In fact, anyone who has been baptized in the Catholic Church has technically been exorcised in order to cleanse them of original sin, in a rite officially known as “baptismal exorcism”. Another type is “simple exorcism”, in which an object or physical place is blessed in order to rid it of evil influence. The sort of exorcism we all think of when we hear the term is identified simply as “real exorcism”, which involves expelling a demon or demons from a possessed individual.
During a Church-sanctioned “real exorcism”, the designated priest – dressed in official surplice and purple stole – employs various methods to try and drive the demon out. The ritual consists mainly of a series of prayers that both implore God to free the possessed person from the Devil’s influence (“the imploring formula”) and demand that the demon leave the possessed individual in the name of God (“the imperative formula”). At particular times the priest will also perform actions such as sprinkling holy water, making the sign of the cross upon the possessed, and touching the possessed with Catholic relics, often those associated with a saint (the actual physical remains of saints, including bone fragments and hair, are also known to have been used).
The “real exorcism” ritual is considered to be an incredibly dangerous and demanding spiritual and physical task, and while all ordained priests are technically eligible to perform an exorcism, only a select few of them ever actually do, at least in any official capacity (though the modern world is filled with those claiming to be exorcists, many of them scam artists). The priest performing an exorcism sanctioned by the Catholic Church must actually be appointed by a Bishop who believes that the man in question is up to the rigors of the task before him, as it is believed by many in the Church that if the priest is not strong enough in his religious convictions he may be susceptible to possession himself.
Interestingly, Vatican-affiliated school Regina Apostolorum University in Rome now offers a class on exorcism entitled “Exorcism and the Prayer of Liberation”. In the course, priests (and some non-priests) learn about the historical and theological basis of exorcism and hear lectures by experts in satanic cults, criminology and other areas related to Satanism and demonic possession, as well as by authorities in the psychiatric field, whose role is to educate students about the mental illnesses that may be confused with “genuine” demonic possession. The fact that the class is only six years old (it began in 2004) is a sure sign that the practice of exorcism, while not nearly as prevalent as it was in the earlier days of the Catholic church, is still alive and well in the modern world.
There’s even an organization named the International Association of Exorcists that was founded in 1993 – that’s just 17 years ago – by six Roman Catholic priests who still believe demonic possession to be a prevailing problem in the world and dedicate themselves to training and supporting priests who engage in exorcisms. Indeed, the U.S. Catholic Church reportedly receives about 400 inquiries every year from people who believe themselves or someone they know to be possessed by the Devil, and according to a 2005 Gallup poll 42% of Americans still believe in possession. Even if you’re a skeptic, that’s quite a startling number, and it should give pause to anyone who may be under the impression that exorcism is confined to the past and Hollywood fright movies.
In this day and age, the word “troll” is often used to describe various online nuisances. Yet as abundant and irksome as the modern troll can be, they aren’t usually as fearsome as their mythological counterparts. I’m not talking about the small and gentler versions that have become more common to see in media. No, there are much bigger and scarier trolls out there—and André Øvredal’s movie Troll Hunter is one of the best places to find them.
It doesn’t take long for Troll Hunter (or Trolljegeren) to dump the Blair Witch Project-esque setup and aim for something a lot fresher. The trajectory of the story is augmented by Otto Jespersen’s character Hans, the titular Troll Hunter. The second he comes barreling out of the deep, dark woods and shouts “troll” at the camera, this movie takes a turn into what feels like uncharted territory. Not only subject-wise, but also conceptually.
For fantastical and made-up subject matter in cinema, found footage is a fast way to add a guise of believability. After all, what we accept to be the most crucial aspect of documentaries—the truth—rubs off on pseudo-documentaries, despite our understanding of the pretense involved. That is what Øvredal delivered with Troll Hunter: a movie so convincing that some viewers wondered if trolls really do exist. So, had this been straightforwardly made, it likely wouldn’t have been as effective. Conventional narratives would be more inclined to treat something like trolls as flat out unreal, and never try to convince the audience to think otherwise.
Hans petrifies the three-headed Tusseladd troll.
The viewers, like the characters trailing Hans, are quickly thrown into the deeper end of that extraordinary story. They have to process all this new information while staying on the go. So, although there is no significant amount of meandering, narratively or physically, there is still a good amount of atmosphere, not to mention tension building. It’s never anything frightful, but then again, Troll Hunter isn’t your standard offering of horror; it’s more on the low end of the dark fantasy spectrum. We aren’t ever spirited away to a faraway world—we stay in rather familiar surroundings, as well as dip into those less so. The outcome is a movie where you’re constantly more in awe than in terror.
As fantasy fiction might do, Troll Hunter prefers not to deal with incredulity. There is no time to waste on doubt, as interviewer Thomas (Glenn Erland Tosterud), soundperson Johanna (Johanna Mørck), and cameraman Kalle (Tomas Alf Larsen) all follow Hans around, recording whatever this character is willing to reveal about his bizarre job. Of course, the Troll Hunter himself is not an open book; in that respect, the diegetic documentary fails to fully capture and unpack the more interesting of its two subjects. Yes, all those giant, monstrous trolls are indeed incredible, but understandably, your mind wanders to their pursuer. What kind of person signs up for this gig and then chooses to stick with it for so long?
Reviews have called out Troll Hunter for its lack of character development. In regard to Thomas and his fellow documentarians, that criticism is valid, but bear in mind, they aren’t the focus of the story, either. Meanwhile, Hans is a well-crafted character. At least better than first realized. Before he was introduced, Hans had already grown tired of the troll grind. Fed up with that low compensation for his services, resentful of the bureaucracy, and wanting to expose his employer on a large scale, Hans’ discontent is glaring.
Then there are those finer details about the Troll Hunter, such as that indifference to both the natural splendor of his everyday surroundings and the affections of an obviously smitten colleague, that also suggest some level of despondency. So it is fair to say this movie doesn’t feature any sizable growth for its characters; however, the namesake isn’t underwritten. No doubt, putting a real-life character like Otto Jespersen in that role is partly why Hans is so fascinating—maybe even relatable.
Otto Jespersen as Hans the Troll Hunter.
There is always a small risk whenever using the term “mockumentary” to describe a found-footage movie, as the word could imply humor where there is none. In the case of Troll Hunter, the term’s usage is appropriate. Some folks have claimed the English-dubbed version has the more comedic tone, however, the Norwegian cut isn’t exactly humorless. Apart from the trolls’ absurd appearances, this is a movie where the characters nearly choke on the monsters’ farts, and Christians are like walking targets. Hans’ complete apathy towards everything is another cause of laughter. Overall, the comedy is intentionally dry and inconsistent. Unfunny, though? Absolutely not.
In a movie where endemic creatures are maltreated, as well as disavowed from living freely and peacefully, it’s hard not to notice the ecological message buried beneath the story. In addition to that is the unmistakable political satire. There is this whole business about intrusive and unsightly power lines—like trolls, they’re big blemishes on the land—that leads to what is perhaps the movie’s funniest moment. The scene in question is that one where certain electric lines, the ones secretly being used to keep the trolls at bay, go in a loop and don’t actually send power to any residents. Yet the monitors of said lines don’t find this at all weird. So it stands to reason that Øvredal was having a go at those who accept the government’s doings without question.
Looking past the fact that trolls aren’t actually real, this movie is an enlightening source of information. And not just for international audiences; Norwegians, too, get schooled about their homeland’s own mythology. It’s also evident from everything on screen that Øvredal and his crew were enthusiastic about the topic. The creature designs are the most indicative of that zeal; those imaginative yet myth-accurate manifestations are equally amusing and grotesque. One second you’re laughing at their phallic noses, the next you’re white-knuckling during a hairy sequence. Most surprisingly is how well the trolls’ visual effects hold up after fifteen years. It’s not all spotless, but on the whole, they remain impressive.
Vouching for a mockumentary about trolls isn’t easy, but those who do come around and give it a shot will more than likely be grateful for the recommendation. For Troll Hunter is a real find in that vast and varied genre we call “found footage“.
A bridge troll reaches up for food and finds Hans decked out in armor.
You must be logged in to post a comment.