movie review: The Last Exorcism
The Last Exorcism is a horror film that is more intriguing than scary. It works in some ways and not others, but even when it fails, it often at least fails in an interesting way. I'd like to break the discussion down into several aspects of the film; skip the first paragraph only if you're hyper, hyper sensitive to spoilers, as I don't give anything important away, but I do discuss the ending in vague generalities.
The Ending -- I promised to speak in vague generalities to avoid giving anything away, so here goes. The way I see it, there are only three major types of twist endings a movie can have. There's the mind-blowing twist that forces you to reconsider significance of everying that has preceeded it (think The Usual Suspects, or almost anything written by M. Night Shyamalan), the "what a gyp!" twist that forces you to dismiss the significance of everything that has preceeded it (think "it was all just a dream!"), and, last and certainly least, the "huh, what?" twist that confuses everyone and explains nothing. Sadly, the ending to this film falls squarely in that latter category.
The Format -- The Last Exorcism is yet another faux-documentary style horror film. The concept, once both effective and intriguing, is now getting old and dated, as I've already explained in detail in my previous blog entry, "It Would be Scarier if I Actually Believed It" (and here's the link, if you're curious: http://moremoviemanmusings.blogspot.com/2010/06/it-would-be-scarier-if-i-actually.html). If you're not interested in reading another whole blog entry, the gist of my earlier entry was that the concept depends too heavily on convincing the viewer that the events in the film actually happened, that you're watching actual footage. The Blair Witch Project, for example, was a lot scarier for those who thought they were really watching the final, mysterious, terrifying days of three filmmakers lost in the woods. For many people who knew it was a hoax, it was downright laughable.
By now, even most otherwise guillible viewers are wise to the faux-documentary style. The Blair Witch Project inspired widespread speculation about its authenticity as a documentary. I doubt many people will speculate that The Last Exorcism is genuine. There are even stretches of the film when the camera work and editing are too Hollywood-smooth to be mistaken for an actual documentary, as if the filmmakers knew that the viewers wouldn't fall for the charade on any level, and so occasionally abandon the format they've established, hoping that we're so caught up in the narrative that we don't notice the obvious lack of spontanaeity. For all I know, this was the best way to tell this particular tale (it certainly provides an easy excuse for a lot of exposition). I would be really interested to ask the filmmakers why they chose this format.
The Scares -- Didn't really work for me. This is coming from someone who thinks The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose are two of the most frightening films ever made, but the bottom line is that the exorcism itself, and the girl who is possessed, aren't really the most interesting aspects of the film, although they're clearly meant to be. We know that the girl is going to be alternately sweet and cruel, helpless and violent, both victim and villain. We know she will speak in strange voices, sometimes in laguages that (other characters will gasp) she couldn't possibly know, and when the possession reaches its height, she will contort her body horrifically and even exhibit telekinetic powers. This is less a formula than a checklist, and without adding anything new to the mix, the possession in The Last Exorcism simply lacks intrigue.
On the other hand, just as this film would be a lot more effective on novices to the overused format, it might be terrifying for someone who is unfamiliar to exorcism/possession films.
The Supporting Characters -- There are a few supporting characters, but the two most prevalent are Caleb and Louis, the possessed girl's brother and father. For inexplicable reasons, the writers chose to depict Caleb and Louis with every redneck cliche in the book. They've both got closed-minded, stereotyped, and strong views on the church, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, and, of course, city-folk. Caleb wears an army hat. Louis carries a shot-gun and demonstrates that he's a little too eager to use it. The viewer shakes his head and wonders whether the writers even tried to put any imagination at all into either character. If so, it certainly, certainly doesn't show.
The Main Character -- The main character, Reverend Cotton Marcus, is so believable, complex, intriguing, and original, that he almost makes up for all of the other film's shortcomings. The writers could have gotten away with making Marcus simply a charlatan (Rev. Ernest in Repossessed), a doubting Thomas (Father Karras in The Exorcist), an earnest believer (Father Moore in Emily Rose), or a jaded but seasoned pro (the main character in Constantine) and, because the main attraction is supposed to be the possessed girl rather than the exorcist, they would have gotten away with keeping him one-dimensional without much complaint from critics or viewers. Instead, they chose to provide Cotton Marcus with aspects of all of these characteristics.
Marcus's back story is just credible enough to be intriguing. Marcus comes from a long line of evangelical preachers and exorcists; both he and his father boast to having performed hundreds of exorcisms, and Marcus himself has been preaching the Word of God since he was a little boy. Then came a crisis of faith -- not from a bad event, which would be the cliche, but from a good event: Marcus's son had a very difficult birth, and, for a while, his survival was touch-and-go. When the kid managed to recover, Marcus was stunned to find that his first thought wasn't "thank God!" but "thank the doctors!" This led to a chain of thought that caused Marcus to question not only his current belief in God, but his past alleged belief as well. Had he ever really believed in God? Or has he just been operating on auto-pilot, acting out the role his father had laid out for him?
Still preaching despite his continually increasing lack of faith, Marcus soon realizes that his congregants are equally on auto-pilot; he even tests this suspicion by sneaking a banana bread recipe into one of his sermons, and his parishioners, sure enough, cry out "amen" and "hallelujah" but fail to notice Marcus's test.
His biggest crisis of faith is a sudden disbelief in the validity of possession and exorcism. The Last Exorcism is about Marcus's determination to discredit possession by faking an exorcism. His methods for faking an exorcism (or, at least, his planned methods, before the possession turns out to be genuine) do an excellent job of demonstrating to the film's audience how easily an exorcist can fake paranormal events, in an attempt to use the power of suggestion to exorcise a believer's demons -- which, Marcus insists, are purely psychological, not supernatural.
All of this adds up to a very interesting character. Marcus may be arrogant, but his arrogance lacks condescension or cruelty. He may be more than a bit too full of himself, but his motivation to mock a solemn Christian belief is well-intended, as he is reacting with sincere concern to a newspaper story in which a boy was recently killed in an attempted exorcism. "If I can manage to expose the falsehoods at the heart of exorcism," Marcus hopes, "no innocent child should ever have to die again at the hands of a misguided, would-be exorcist."
Of course, since this is a horror movie, Marcus's best laid plans, and his assertion that demonic possession is bunk, quickly go out the window. But I loved how, even as evidence in favor of actual possesion continues to mount, Marcus continues to insist that it's all just psychological in nature. He used to take the supernatural for granted, and now he's clearly overcompensating in the other direction.
You know what? Leave out the cliched supporting characters, the ineffective scares, and the stupid twist endings, and this movie would border on genius. I could watch a whole movie about this character alone, without all the gimmicks. The character of Cotton Marcus makes the movie worth watching. The rest is just window dressing.
The Ending -- I promised to speak in vague generalities to avoid giving anything away, so here goes. The way I see it, there are only three major types of twist endings a movie can have. There's the mind-blowing twist that forces you to reconsider significance of everying that has preceeded it (think The Usual Suspects, or almost anything written by M. Night Shyamalan), the "what a gyp!" twist that forces you to dismiss the significance of everything that has preceeded it (think "it was all just a dream!"), and, last and certainly least, the "huh, what?" twist that confuses everyone and explains nothing. Sadly, the ending to this film falls squarely in that latter category.
The Format -- The Last Exorcism is yet another faux-documentary style horror film. The concept, once both effective and intriguing, is now getting old and dated, as I've already explained in detail in my previous blog entry, "It Would be Scarier if I Actually Believed It" (and here's the link, if you're curious: http://moremoviemanmusings.blogspot.com/2010/06/it-would-be-scarier-if-i-actually.html). If you're not interested in reading another whole blog entry, the gist of my earlier entry was that the concept depends too heavily on convincing the viewer that the events in the film actually happened, that you're watching actual footage. The Blair Witch Project, for example, was a lot scarier for those who thought they were really watching the final, mysterious, terrifying days of three filmmakers lost in the woods. For many people who knew it was a hoax, it was downright laughable.
By now, even most otherwise guillible viewers are wise to the faux-documentary style. The Blair Witch Project inspired widespread speculation about its authenticity as a documentary. I doubt many people will speculate that The Last Exorcism is genuine. There are even stretches of the film when the camera work and editing are too Hollywood-smooth to be mistaken for an actual documentary, as if the filmmakers knew that the viewers wouldn't fall for the charade on any level, and so occasionally abandon the format they've established, hoping that we're so caught up in the narrative that we don't notice the obvious lack of spontanaeity. For all I know, this was the best way to tell this particular tale (it certainly provides an easy excuse for a lot of exposition). I would be really interested to ask the filmmakers why they chose this format.
The Scares -- Didn't really work for me. This is coming from someone who thinks The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose are two of the most frightening films ever made, but the bottom line is that the exorcism itself, and the girl who is possessed, aren't really the most interesting aspects of the film, although they're clearly meant to be. We know that the girl is going to be alternately sweet and cruel, helpless and violent, both victim and villain. We know she will speak in strange voices, sometimes in laguages that (other characters will gasp) she couldn't possibly know, and when the possession reaches its height, she will contort her body horrifically and even exhibit telekinetic powers. This is less a formula than a checklist, and without adding anything new to the mix, the possession in The Last Exorcism simply lacks intrigue.
On the other hand, just as this film would be a lot more effective on novices to the overused format, it might be terrifying for someone who is unfamiliar to exorcism/possession films.
The Supporting Characters -- There are a few supporting characters, but the two most prevalent are Caleb and Louis, the possessed girl's brother and father. For inexplicable reasons, the writers chose to depict Caleb and Louis with every redneck cliche in the book. They've both got closed-minded, stereotyped, and strong views on the church, medicine, psychology, psychiatry, and, of course, city-folk. Caleb wears an army hat. Louis carries a shot-gun and demonstrates that he's a little too eager to use it. The viewer shakes his head and wonders whether the writers even tried to put any imagination at all into either character. If so, it certainly, certainly doesn't show.
The Main Character -- The main character, Reverend Cotton Marcus, is so believable, complex, intriguing, and original, that he almost makes up for all of the other film's shortcomings. The writers could have gotten away with making Marcus simply a charlatan (Rev. Ernest in Repossessed), a doubting Thomas (Father Karras in The Exorcist), an earnest believer (Father Moore in Emily Rose), or a jaded but seasoned pro (the main character in Constantine) and, because the main attraction is supposed to be the possessed girl rather than the exorcist, they would have gotten away with keeping him one-dimensional without much complaint from critics or viewers. Instead, they chose to provide Cotton Marcus with aspects of all of these characteristics.
Marcus's back story is just credible enough to be intriguing. Marcus comes from a long line of evangelical preachers and exorcists; both he and his father boast to having performed hundreds of exorcisms, and Marcus himself has been preaching the Word of God since he was a little boy. Then came a crisis of faith -- not from a bad event, which would be the cliche, but from a good event: Marcus's son had a very difficult birth, and, for a while, his survival was touch-and-go. When the kid managed to recover, Marcus was stunned to find that his first thought wasn't "thank God!" but "thank the doctors!" This led to a chain of thought that caused Marcus to question not only his current belief in God, but his past alleged belief as well. Had he ever really believed in God? Or has he just been operating on auto-pilot, acting out the role his father had laid out for him?
Still preaching despite his continually increasing lack of faith, Marcus soon realizes that his congregants are equally on auto-pilot; he even tests this suspicion by sneaking a banana bread recipe into one of his sermons, and his parishioners, sure enough, cry out "amen" and "hallelujah" but fail to notice Marcus's test.
His biggest crisis of faith is a sudden disbelief in the validity of possession and exorcism. The Last Exorcism is about Marcus's determination to discredit possession by faking an exorcism. His methods for faking an exorcism (or, at least, his planned methods, before the possession turns out to be genuine) do an excellent job of demonstrating to the film's audience how easily an exorcist can fake paranormal events, in an attempt to use the power of suggestion to exorcise a believer's demons -- which, Marcus insists, are purely psychological, not supernatural.
All of this adds up to a very interesting character. Marcus may be arrogant, but his arrogance lacks condescension or cruelty. He may be more than a bit too full of himself, but his motivation to mock a solemn Christian belief is well-intended, as he is reacting with sincere concern to a newspaper story in which a boy was recently killed in an attempted exorcism. "If I can manage to expose the falsehoods at the heart of exorcism," Marcus hopes, "no innocent child should ever have to die again at the hands of a misguided, would-be exorcist."
Of course, since this is a horror movie, Marcus's best laid plans, and his assertion that demonic possession is bunk, quickly go out the window. But I loved how, even as evidence in favor of actual possesion continues to mount, Marcus continues to insist that it's all just psychological in nature. He used to take the supernatural for granted, and now he's clearly overcompensating in the other direction.
You know what? Leave out the cliched supporting characters, the ineffective scares, and the stupid twist endings, and this movie would border on genius. I could watch a whole movie about this character alone, without all the gimmicks. The character of Cotton Marcus makes the movie worth watching. The rest is just window dressing.
posted by Movie Man at
6:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home