A Tale of Two Exorcisms

Concerning The Last Exorcism and Exorcismus

I watched quite a few scary movies in honor of Halloween and for Peril on the Screen including two about exorcisms. There were some overlapping features, but they diverge enough that I thought it might be interesting to review them together here.

(Sorry there are spoilers)

Both movies are about young girls possessed by a demon of some sort. In each, the exorcism is recorded. I found that for the most part the characters' behaviors were realistic and they responded in believable ways (there are a couple of exceptions, but we can ignore them for now). The acting wasn't spectacular, but I would say that in both films the main characters-- the priests and the girls-- did a good job portraying the drama and terror of the ritual. These two movies are full of the “standard” tropes of such movies; body contortions, speaking in tongues/different voices, writing in blood, etc. I really wonder if there can be anything original about future exorcism films.

Despite these similarities, the two movies diverge in significant ways. The first The Last Exorcism is filmed as a documentary (mockumentary). I actually don't mind this usually, I'm not bothered by the “shaky camera." The premise is that an extravagant preacher (for once not a Catholic priest) from Baton Rouge, LA has been faking exorcisms for the past few years; he hashad a serious crisis of faith and has a rather contemptuous attitude towards his congregation at the beginning of the movie. He has decided to do one final exorcism, but will document the entire experience from deciding which case to take, during the investigation, and to the end. His purpose is to expose exorcisms as being not only fake, but, in fact, harmful to those undergoing such rituals. The girl he decides to visit lives in rural Louisiana.

Exorcismus is a Spanish movie (in English) filmed in the standard style, rather than as a documentary though there are scenes from the recorded exorcism. Here we have a Catholic priest who has been involved previously in a botched exorcism and, while not entirely removed from the Church, is in disgrace. He is presented as deeply religious. The possessed girl is his niece and they all live in an urban neighborhood (possibly in England, but I'm not sure).

The differences in the religious figures (priest/preacher) lead to differences in the ways that the exorcisms are cast. In The Last Exorcism, due to his lack of faith, the possession is portrayed as being purely social/psychological. The preacher arrives at the girl's house as a skeptic (well, disbeliever in fact) and interviews various people trying to piece together her life looking for secular reasons for her behavior. The priest in Exorcismus, on the other hand, firmly believes that his niece is possessed. Furthermore, there are incontrovertible signs that there is something supernatural going on with her that could not be explained away by a viewer such as her levitating off the ground. In the first movie, everything the girl does can (theoretically) be caused by something mundane rather than demonic.

In both films, there is a surprise development, a twist in the plot, revolving around the priest/preacher and the audience's perception of the possession. For the Louisiana preacher, it turns out that his client is in fact possessed by a demon. But in order to get to this point (after all the contrary evidence), the plot becomes totally derailed. The ending, which is over the top potentially to prove once and for all that the girl is possessed, is five minutes of some of the most ridiculous footage that I've seen in a movie. And here The Last Exorcism devolves into a series of stereotypes that seriously lowered my opinion of it. As I stated above, they are in rural Louisiana. Even from the beginning there are some cliches overplayed, but by the end what you have are incestuous, ignorant, backward superstitious country folk who just happen to be part of a Satanic cult. To top it off, the “manifestation” of the “demon” at the end just looks stupid, and I was definitely rolling my eyes during the final sequence.

The twist in Exorcismus, on the other hand, actually succeeds in making the movie better. The priest as we discover is not only a believer but actually an insane fanatic who is happy to destroy his entire family just so he can capture definitive evidence of demons on camera. Due to his disgrace from a previous exorcism, he hatches a plan to capture a demon in the act so that he can regain his position within the church and prove to people that he his behavior during the botched ritual was justifiable. He teaches his niece about demons and blood sacrifices and when she does become possessed he quickly jumps in to take over. As we find out though, his actions during the taped sessions do not quite match up; he has not been trying to cast out the demon because he wants it to get stronger – he wants to catch it in the act doing something undeniable such as levitating. There are some holes here. It is not a perfect set up, but overall this surprise addition to the plot works much better than the “surprises” in store for you in The Last Exorcism.

I give Excorcismus 3 ½ stars and I would have given The Last Excorcism the same score if the last 5 minutes of the movie didn't exist (yes, it is that bad). Instead, I give it maybe 2 stars.