Connect with us

Editorials

Between Heaven and Hell: The Crisis of Faith at the Heart of ‘The Exorcist’

Published

on

Exorcist

The Exorcist rocked the world 50 years ago and horror has never been the same since. It shocked audiences with its unflinching portrayals of disturbing medical examinations, levels of profanity that shot right past those considered “acceptable” for Hollywood studio films, and a scene in which a twelve-year-old girl masturbates with a crucifix. It was decried by some and lauded by others. Evangelist Billy Graham famously said, “the Devil is in every frame” and urged Christians not to see the film and thereby expose themselves to such evil. The Catholic Church was mixed, condemning the film’s profanity and violence, but individuals within the church also praised its depiction of the power of good over evil. Roger Ebert loved it. Pauline Kael hated it. What matters, though, is people saw it, and they saw it in droves, making it the biggest box-office smash of the year. In 1973 and 74 it famously induced fainting, screaming, and vomiting. There are several filmed interviews with visibly shaken patrons who had walked out on the film practically in hysterics. But beneath all this sensation is the reason why it was then and continues to be so effective. It is only nominally a film about demons and the devil—at its core, The Exorcist is a deeply human story.

The Exorcist is about many things, but for me, more than anything, it is about various experiences of religious belief and the tensions between faith and reason. At one end of the spectrum stands Father Lancaster Merrin, played by Max von Sydow. Merrin is the personification of stalwart faith, predestined from the film’s opening sequence to face off against the demon. He is unshakable in his belief in God and the Roman Catholic religion through which he expresses that faith. He will be a force for good in the world or die trying. At the other end of this spectrum is Chris MacNeil (Ellen Burstyn) who before the events of the film simply doesn’t give any thought to the spiritual dimension and has no time for any kind of belief in a god or anything connected with religion. She seems fascinated by the priests and nuns that inhabit the neighborhood where she is living during her current film shoot, but it is more like she is an armchair anthropologist observing a foreign culture.

Caught between these two worlds is the struggling Father Damien Karras (Jason Miller), a priest who believes he has lost, or is in the process of losing, his faith. The writer of both the original novel and the screenplay for The Exorcist, William Peter Blatty, gives full investment to all the characters he creates, but he seems to understand Karras in a deeper way than any of the others. As a practicing Roman Catholic, he often wrote about matters of faith and regularly delved deep into the questions, contradictions, and tensions of belief and doubt. His novels The Ninth Configuration and Legion and the films that were made from them (the latter released as The Exorcist III) are testaments to this. Through Karras, Blatty creates a surrogate for the portion of his audience that may not relate to Merrin or MacNeil; the person ensconced in a religious faith who struggles with doubts about their system of belief and whether or not there is anything to believe in at all. He is simultaneously a man of the cloth and a man of science, a psychologist by training but his training has come through the Jesuit system he has been consecrated into. He is a personification of the tension between faith and reason that is written into the Christian scriptures themselves. In another sense, Karras also personifies an entire nation in transition as America was beginning its shift to an increasingly post-religious state.

On a less esoteric and far more relatable human level, Damien Karras has lost hope, and the greatest symptom of this is his sense of helplessness. In a key moment early in the film, a homeless man holds out his hand and asks, “Fadda! Could you help an old altar boy?” before adding, “I’m a Cat’lic.” Damien can only stare at the man in silence. Perhaps he is repulsed, but maybe even more he is frozen by his inability to truly help this man, and his helplessness has left him empty, cold, and unable to feel the kind of empathy that likely burned like a fire within him in his younger days. Damien may well be asking the same question in his own heart to his Heavenly Father, pleading for some kind of awakening, calling out to his God, “can you help an old altar boy, Father?” but only getting the dreadful Silence in response. Soon after this incident, he confesses to a friend and fellow priest, “I think I’ve lost my faith, Tom,” and is clearly devastated to speak the words aloud. He also feels helpless in his inability to help his dying and needy mother, played by Vasiliki Maliaros, in her last days. He seems unable to summon the strength to comfort her in the ways he would like. When she dies, it reduces him to little more than a shell.

When Chris MacNeil comes to Father Karras in desperation, he uses the words of his science rather than faith to comfort her, but by this point, even the skeptic Chris has reached the end of her reliance upon human power. “She’s already seen every fucking psychiatrist in the world, she needs a priest!” Chris exclaims in exasperation, prompting Karras to evaluate her daughter Reagan (Linda Blair). At first, he puts the girl through the similar paces of the psychologists from outside the church that she had seen before, concluding that Reagan is experiencing some kind of extreme psychological episode. When Merrin comes to the house, Karras tries to fill him in on his psychological conclusions, saying there appear to be three distinct personalities, to which Merrin responds, “there is only one.” With these words, Merrin immediately reestablishes himself as the unshakable rock of faith in the film after a long absence from the narrative.

After the exorcism begins, Damien’s doubts begin to crumble; he simply cannot explain away what he is seeing and experiencing any longer. The demon uses the incident with the homeless man and experiences with his mother to break him mentally and physically. “You killed your mother! You left her alone to die!” it shouts. The demon uses the voices of both the derelict and his mother to needle under his psyche. Late in the film, it even appears to Damien as his mother, preying on his guilt, tightening the screws in his brain, mocking him, destroying him. These trials all culminate in his final act of compassion in which he sacrifices himself for Reagan, calling on the demon to leave her and come into him, laying down his life for her safety. In the end, he is given the opportunity for one last act of faith when he gives his silent confession to his closest friend Father Dyer, played by real life Jesuit priest William O’Malley, at the base of the stairs he has just tumbled down. According to John 15:13, Jesus said, “greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” In the end, Karras’s act is an act of the greatest love as he lays down his life for Reagan, her mother, and perhaps his friends Lt. Kinderman (Lee J. Cobb) and Father Dyer. The film does not fully answer whether Karras reclaims his faith in the end, but there is a strong implication of it.

Director William Friedkin continually maintained that “you get out of The Exorcist what you bring into it.” This statement, which he made in several interviews over many years, has always rung true for me. Through the various stages of my life, what I bring to and take out of the film continues to evolve. I originally came to it as a sort of test of my mettle as a horror fan. When I first saw it, The Exorcist was regularly touted as “the scariest movie of all time,” topping dozens of lists of such rankings. I had heard about the rotating head, the vomit, and the audience reactions. The adults in my circle seemed to discuss it only occasionally and in hushed tones when they did. It had also been labeled as a kind of forbidden fruit by my religious upbringing.

'The Exorcist': You Have to See These Incredible Custom Action Figure Sculpts!

I distinctly remember my childhood pastor describing the film as featuring scenes of “demons flying out of people,” proving that by the mid-1980s the film had developed something of a mythic reputation. Curiosity drove me to the library where I pored over books about monsters and horror movies, featuring stills that remain in my mind to this day, including several from The Exorcist, which sent my imagination racing. When I actually saw the film, there were certainly moments that shocked and disturbed me, but it was also clear that there had been a fair amount of misinformation spread about it. I can’t claim to have fully grasped it at the time, the first section felt slow to my young self and contained a distinct lack of the pea-soup-spewing, head-rotating horror I expected. When those moments did come, they certainly delivered, but it just felt like it took forever to get there. That said, I became fascinated with the movie and watched it over and over until I became familiar with practically every beat. It even became something of a comforting film to watch. I knew it so well that I could practically play it in my mind if I so desired, which remains largely the case to this day.

In my mid-teens I had a profound spiritual awakening. The faith of my youth, which always seemed so distant became incredibly real and close to me. During that time, I felt I should distance myself from horror. Fortunately, it didn’t last long, and it was a conversation about The Exorcist that brought this brief period of fasting from horror to an end. I remember the bass player for the worship band that I played with at the time saying he had watched the film the night before and been blown away by it. He said that it was really getting at the heart of some profound truths about the nature of faith and its tension with science and reason. This made me drastically reappraise the film and come to realize that the heart of The Exorcist is not the shocks, scares, and supernatural fireworks, but the crisis of faith experienced by its tragic hero, Father Karras. I went on to a career in church ministry as a music director that lasted ten years. I have mixed feelings about those years. I am grateful for the many wonderful people I got to know, but also realize that I was not right for that role. I have now been away from church work for longer than I was in it, happily teaching third graders how to play recorders.

These days I find myself relating to Damien Karras more than ever before. Like him, I sometimes look at the world around me with a sense of helplessness. There is so much pain, grief, and tragedy and so little I can do about it. I see those who claim to be Christians consistently profaning the name of Jesus by placing on a pedestal the kinds of hypocrisy he decried. I see churches that clearly worship politics and politicians over the God they claim to serve. I see them turn away and even ridicule the most vulnerable, the “least of these brothers of mine” that Jesus commanded his followers feed and clothe and visit while sick and imprisoned. It angers me and it grieves me. It pushes me further away from belief, but still I hold on, even if it is only by a thread. Like Karras, there are too many things that I have seen, heard, and experienced that I cannot simply explain away. And so, also like him, I stand on the tightrope of doubt between faith and unbelief and wonder if I’ll ever fully get to either side.

Like Damien Karras I feel the unbearable Silence, the very same lamented by Hamlet in his last breath, Ingmar Bergman in his faith trilogy, and Shusaku Endo in his brilliant novel. And I question whether the Silence is real or if I have lost the ability to listen. Still, in the back of my mind these words echo, perhaps as they would in the mind of Damien Karras, “and we know that all things work together for good…” Challenges work to make us stronger, to love our neighbor more, to help us feel joy more deeply, to persevere through the dark places of life, to give us the strength to sacrifice for others. This will most likely not include calling a demon into yourself and taking a header down a flight of stairs, but there are many forms of sacrifice. They don’t even need to be monetary. It can be time, talent, attention, empathy, kindness. When we spend any of these things on someone else, there is sacrifice involved. No matter how small or insignificant it may seem, it is not wasted. When I see these acts of sacrifice and do my best to perform them myself, it goes a long way to restore my faith, not only in humanity, but also in the God I still cling to as best I can. I hope someday that I’ll end up on one side or the other of this chasm between belief and unbelief, but for now, I suppose this tightrope I and many like me balance on is as good a place to be as any.

Editorials

What’s Wrong with My Baby!? Larry Cohen’s ‘It’s Alive’ at 50

Published

on

Netflix It's Alive

Soon after the New Hollywood generation took over the entertainment industry, they started having children. And more than any filmmakers that came before—they were terrified. Rosemary’s Baby (1968), The Exorcist (1973), The Omen (1976), Eraserhead (1977), The Brood (1979), The Shining (1980), Possession (1981), and many others all deal, at least in part, with the fears of becoming or being a parent. What if my child turns out to be a monster? is corrupted by some evil force? or turns out to be the fucking Antichrist? What if I screw them up somehow, or can’t help them, or even go insane and try to kill them? Horror has always been at its best when exploring relatable fears through extreme circumstances. A prime example of this is Larry Cohen’s 1974 monster-baby movie It’s Alive, which explores the not only the rollercoaster of emotions that any parent experiences when confronted with the difficulties of raising a child, but long-standing questions of who or what is at fault when something goes horribly wrong.

Cohen begins making his underlying points early in the film as Frank Davis (John P. Ryan) discusses the state of the world with a group of expectant fathers in a hospital waiting room. They discuss the “overabundance of lead” in foods and the environment, smog, and pesticides that only serve to produce roaches that are “bigger, stronger, and harder to kill.” Frank comments that this is “quite a world to bring a kid into.” This has long been a discussion point among people when trying to decide whether to have kids or not. I’ve had many conversations with friends who have said they feel it’s irresponsible to bring children into such a violent, broken, and dangerous world, and I certainly don’t begrudge them this. My wife and I did decide to have children but that doesn’t mean that it’s been easy.

Immediately following this scene comes It’s Alive’s most famous sequence in which Frank’s wife Lenore (Sharon Farrell) is the only person left alive in her delivery room, the doctors clawed and bitten to death by her mutant baby, which has escaped. “What does my baby look like!? What’s wrong with my baby!?” she screams as nurses wheel her frantically into a recovery room. The evening that had begun with such joy and excitement at the birth of their second child turned into a nightmare. This is tough for me to write, but on some level, I can relate to this whiplash of emotion. When my second child was born, they came about five weeks early. I’ll use the pronouns “they/them” for privacy reasons when referring to my kids. Our oldest was still very young and went to stay with my parents and we sped off to the hospital where my wife was taken into an operating room for an emergency c-section. I was able to carry our newborn into the NICU (natal intensive care unit) where I was assured that this was routine for all premature births. The nurses assured me there was nothing to worry about and the baby looked big and healthy. I headed to where my wife was taken to recover to grab a few winks assuming that everything was fine. Well, when I awoke, I headed back over to the NICU to find that my child was not where I left them. The nurse found me and told me that the baby’s lungs were underdeveloped, and they had to put them in a special room connected to oxygen tubes and wires to monitor their vitals.

It’s difficult to express the fear that overwhelmed me in those moments. Everything turned out okay, but it took a while and I’m convinced to this day that their anxiety struggles spring from these first weeks of life. As our children grew, we learned that two of the three were on the spectrum and that anxiety, depression, ADHD, and OCD were also playing a part in their lives. Parents, at least speaking for myself, can’t help but blame themselves for the struggles their children face. The “if only” questions creep in and easily overcome the voices that assure us that it really has nothing to do with us. In the film, Lenore says, “maybe it’s all the pills I’ve been taking that brought this on.” Frank muses aloud about how he used to think that Frankenstein was the monster, but when he got older realized he was the one that made the monster. The aptly named Frank is wondering if his baby’s mutation is his fault, if he created the monster that is terrorizing Los Angeles. I have made plenty of “if only” statements about myself over the years. “If only I hadn’t had to work so much, if only I had been around more when they were little.” Mothers may ask themselves, “did I have a drink, too much coffee, or a cigarette before I knew I was pregnant? Was I too stressed out during the pregnancy?” In other words, most parents can’t help but wonder if it’s all their fault.

At one point in the film, Frank goes to the elementary school where his baby has been sighted and is escorted through the halls by police. He overhears someone comment about “screwed up genes,” which brings about age-old questions of nature vs. nurture. Despite the voices around him from doctors and detectives that say, “we know this isn’t your fault,” Frank can’t help but think it is, and that the people who try to tell him it isn’t really think it’s his fault too. There is no doubt that there is a hereditary element to the kinds of mental illness struggles that my children and I deal with. But, and it’s a bit but, good parenting goes a long way in helping children deal with these struggles. Kids need to know they’re not alone, a good parent can provide that, perhaps especially parents that can relate to the same kinds of struggles. The question of nature vs. nurture will likely never be entirely answered but I think there’s more than a good chance that “both/and” is the case. Around the midpoint of the film, Frank agrees to disown the child and sign it over for medical experimentation if caught or killed. Lenore and the older son Chris (Daniel Holzman) seek to nurture and teach the baby, feeling that it is not a monster, but a member of the family.

It’s Alive takes these ideas to an even greater degree in the fact that the Davis Baby really is a monster, a mutant with claws and fangs that murders and eats people. The late ’60s and early ’70s also saw the rise in mass murderers and serial killers which heightened the nature vs. nurture debate. Obviously, these people were not literal monsters but human beings that came from human parents, but something had gone horribly wrong. Often the upbringing of these killers clearly led in part to their antisocial behavior, but this isn’t always the case. It’s Alive asks “what if a ‘monster’ comes from a good home?” In this case is it society, environmental factors, or is it the lead, smog, and pesticides? It is almost impossible to know, but the ending of the film underscores an uncomfortable truth—even monsters have parents.

As the film enters its third act, Frank joins the hunt for his child through the Los Angeles sewers and into the L.A. River. He is armed with a rifle and ready to kill on sight, having divorced himself from any relationship to the child. Then Frank finds his baby crying in the sewers and his fatherly instincts take over. With tears in his eyes, he speaks words of comfort and wraps his son in his coat. He holds him close, pats and rocks him, and whispers that everything is going to be okay. People often wonder how the parents of those who perform heinous acts can sit in court, shed tears, and defend them. I think it’s a complex issue. I’m sure that these parents know that their child has done something evil, but that doesn’t change the fact that they are still their baby. Your child is a piece of yourself formed into a whole new human being. Disowning them would be like cutting off a limb, no matter what they may have done. It doesn’t erase an evil act, far from it, but I can understand the pain of a parent in that situation. I think It’s Alive does an exceptional job placing its audience in that situation.

Despite the serious issues and ideas being examined in the film, It’s Alive is far from a dour affair. At heart, it is still a monster movie and filled with a sense of fun and a great deal of pitch-black humor. In one of its more memorable moments, a milkman is sucked into the rear compartment of his truck as red blood mingles with the white milk from smashed bottles leaking out the back of the truck and streaming down the street. Just after Frank agrees to join the hunt for his baby, the film cuts to the back of an ice cream truck with the words “STOP CHILDREN” emblazoned on it. It’s a movie filled with great kills, a mutant baby—created by make-up effects master Rick Baker early in his career, and plenty of action—and all in a PG rated movie! I’m telling you, the ’70s were wild. It just also happens to have some thoughtful ideas behind it as well.

Which was Larry Cohen’s specialty. Cohen made all kinds of movies, but his most enduring have been his horror films and all of them tackle the social issues and fears of the time they were made. God Told Me To (1976), Q: The Winged Serpent (1982), and The Stuff (1985) are all great examples of his socially aware, low-budget, exploitation filmmaking with a brain and It’s Alive certainly fits right in with that group. Cohen would go on to write and direct two sequels, It Lives Again (aka It’s Alive 2) in 1978 and It’s Alive III: Island of the Alive in 1987 and is credited as a co-writer on the 2008 remake. All these films explore the ideas of parental responsibility in light of the various concerns of the times they were made including abortion rights and AIDS.

Fifty years after It’s Alive was initially released, it has only become more relevant in the ensuing years. Fears surrounding parenthood have been with us since the beginning of time but as the years pass the reasons for these fears only seem to become more and more profound. In today’s world the conversation of the fathers in the waiting room could be expanded to hormones and genetic modifications in food, terrorism, climate change, school and other mass shootings, and other threats that were unknown or at least less of a concern fifty years ago. Perhaps the fearmongering conspiracy theories about chemtrails and vaccines would be mentioned as well, though in a more satirical fashion, as fears some expectant parents encounter while endlessly doomscrolling Facebook or Twitter. Speaking for myself, despite the struggles, the fears, and the sadness that sometimes comes with having children, it’s been worth it. The joys ultimately outweigh all of that, but I understand the terror too. Becoming a parent is no easy choice, nor should it be. But as I look back, I can say that I’m glad we made the choice we did.

I wonder if Frank and Lenore can say the same thing.

Continue Reading