Talk:The Exorcist

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Slightly error in the plot summary[edit]

The current plot summary describe Regan claiming to "be Pazuzu, a manifestation of the Devil Himself" but in reality, Pazuzu is never mentioned by name until the sequel. Instead, Regan simply shouts "AND I'M THE DEVIL! NOW KINDLY UNDO THESE STRAPS!"

If reference to Pazuzu is necessary in the plot summary itself, perhaps we could make reference to the Pazuzu statues in Iraq that also appear later on during the exorcism scene. 119.18.0.214 (talk) 09:20, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed I suppose this might be because Blatty himself had specified that the possessing demon was Pazuzu in the book but, you're right, that name is unmentioned in the film (Blatty was rather annoyed that everyone commenting on the film thought it was the Devil; that may be how it got there. Daniel Case (talk) 06:08, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1975[edit]

Abbythecat (talk) 23:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)as stated in Nat Sagaloff's exorcist legacy book, and clearly stated in exorcist 3, this movie is set in 1975. I have included this. Thanks. A by the at Abbythecat (talk) 23:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I told you on my talk page, this is fanon at best without any indication that the creators clearly meant for the death date on the tombstone in Exorcist III (based on a novel that was not written as a direct sequel) to be a retcon putting the events of the first movie two years later than its release date rather than, say, a mistake made by the production designer. I will be removing it from the article; as I said it's better just to leave any claimed year of the movie's plot out of the synopsis. Daniel Case (talk) 06:33, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet talk 17:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 09:51, 25 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Exorcist; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Wonderful work Daniel Case. With regards to Halloween, you may be interested in an ongoing discussion at WT:DYK. I prefer ALTs 0, 2, and 3, but I think even better hooks are sure to be available from the article (...was denounced as "hardcore pornography"; theatres arranged for ambulances to be on call; a viewer was "contaminated" because it was better than Psycho, etc.) ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The horror movie is bases on real story[edit]

Is horror movie ko Hindi me banana chahiye tha😑 117.233.79.254 (talk) 06:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]