Exorcisms of films have serious “theological errors”

Lucrative subgenre of terror, exorcism is back on screens with “The Ritual” with Al Pacino. But what do they say experienced priests in practice about the “demonic possession” plots that continue to fill movie theaters?

Writer and filmmaker William Peter Blatty was still attending the University of Georgetown in Washington, when he first heard the story of a 14 -year -old who would have been the victim of a “demonic possession.” It was during a literature and scholastic philosophy class given by Father Eugene B. Gallagher.

The case involved Ronald Edwin Hunkeler, in the city of Mount Rainier, in the US state of Maryland, and lasted 94 dias – started on January 15, 1949 and ended April 19. Over the course of three months, inexplicable phenomena would have been witnessed at Bunker Hill Road’s 3,210: The Mattress where the boy slept stirred at night, a heavy armchair moved from side to side and a cold glacier invaded the room.

On March 16, two Jesuit priests, William Bowdern and Raymond Bishop, at the nomination of Archbishop Joseph Ritter, were called to expel the demon of the boy’s body.

“I can guarantee one thing: this case was really real ”, Bowdern declared in the book William Peter Blatty on the Exorcist: From Novel To Film, 1974. “I had no doubt at the time and I still have no.”

Time has passed, but Blatty could not forget what he had heard that day in class. At first, he thought of writing a book based on the case, but was advised against the archbishop: the family did not want to advertise. Thus, he decided to transform history into a work of fiction.

Instead of Mount Rainier in Maryland, the novel would take place in Georgetown, Washington. Instead of 14 -year -old Ronald Edwin Hunkeler, the protagonist would be 12 -12.

Entitled The Exorcistthe book was published on May 5, 1971 and the rights were soon acquired by Warner Bros. The studio even negotiated with Stanley Kubrick, Arthur Penn and Mike Nichols, among other directors, but all refused the proposal for different reasons. Finally, he closed with William Friedkin.

In the book The Exorcist – Secrets and Devotion British cinema critic Mark Kermode points out some of the director’s idiosyncrasies, such as firing firearms on the set, repeating the same scene dozens of times, and to get convincing performances from the actors, to the point of giving them cracks. “The shooting took more than expected and cost infinitely more than planned,” he summarizes.

Blatty’s own argument, the exorcist debuted on December 26, 1973. It cost $ 12 million and yielded $ 402 million.

“It was a punch in the stomach”describes American journalist Peter Biskind. “Theaters had rubbish crates to help who couldn’t keep dinner at their stomach.”

There was born a genre: that of possession films. Only Blatty’s original inspired six feature films and a television series.

Why are exorcism movies so successful?

This month, debut O Ritualby David Midell. After Max von Sydow, Anthony Hopkins and Russell Crowe playing priests in The Exorcist* (1973), The Ritual (2011) and the Pope’s exorcist (2023), among others, is now To the Pacino Who wears the cassock.

But why do exorcism films, judge for their infinity, continue to be so successful?

“On the one hand, There is a lack of theological knowledge. On the other, there is a morbid curiosity for the occultism”, Evaluates Monsignor Rubens Miraglia Zani, a doctorate in canon law from the Pontifical Lateranense University in Rome, and parish priest of the Maruru Marura Maruru Maruru Maruita. At 61 and 12 ministry, he is one of the most experienced exorcists in Brazil.

“Most films about possession are fanciful. It presents a distorted view of the phenomenon and is more concerned with scaring the audience than anything else, ”says Zani, author of courses on the subject.

To the genre of the gender, it recommends two films that, from a theological point of view, considers more faithful: The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005), from Scott Derrickson, and Nefarious (2023), by Cary Solomon and Chuck Konzelman.

In the first, a lawyer is hired to defend a priest accused of negligent murder in the death of Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter), the victim of an unsuccessful exorcism. In the second, a psychiatrist is tasked by a judge to evaluate the mental health of Edward Wayne Brady (Sean Patrick Flanery), a death -senior killer.

What do these movies have in common with the exorcist? Technical Consulting of Specialized Priests. During the filming of the 1973 classic, William Friedkin heard the reverend John Nicola, Thomas Bermingham and William O’Malley, all Jesuits. In the case of Emily Rose’s exorcism, the technical consultancy was from Father John George; No de Nefarious, from Reverend Darrin Merlino.

Emily Rose’s exorcism is based on a true story: that of German student Anna Elisabeth Michel. Supposedly “possessed by demons”, he died in 1976, at the age of 23, after being 67 exorcism sessions, some up to four hours long, held by priests Ernest Alt and Arnold Renz.

The case ended up to the courts: accused of negligent homicide, both the parents of the young woman and the priests involved were sentenced to six months in prison. However, the four ended up on parole.

In addition to Emily Rose’s exorcism, Anneliese Michel’s case inspired Hans-Christian Schmid’s film Requiem (2006), and the book Anneliese Michel-The True Story of a Case of Demonic Possession (2021) by Father José Antonio Forta and Lawrence Leblanc.

Already Nefarious, by Cary Solomon and Chuck Konzelman, is inspired by a work of fiction: the book * Nefarious – the evil plan * (2016), by Steve Deace.