Two years before director William Friedkin to spray with the "exorcist", he made an unforgettable neo-nailant thriller. The 1971 French relationship has a gloomy, immediate feeling, and while it is full of excitement, the portrayal of its basic topics feels unusual sincerely. Fridkin captures the bureaucratic nature of the fight against crime, which often goes hand in hand with the highest form of prejudice that extends to every layers of society. Each of these sentimental feelings is woven with the frenetic intensity that pushes the border, culminating in One of the darkest, exciting sequences of chasing that have ever been put on film. This natural intrusion for stunning crafts paid off in all the true ways in his next movie "Exorcist", still considered standard, visceral horror In the demonic genre of ownership.

Friedkin's horror brand in "Exorcist" is more complex than what the main reputation of the film has promised. Yes, the 1973 film aims to be afraid and shocked by forming an unpleasant, exaggerated portrait of demonic possession, but it is also much more. Friedkin represents us with the interior of Reagan (Linda Blair) before starting Levi or turning his head all the way.

Reagan is a shy, lonely child seeking shelter in art to do the best of her situation, with not many friends trusting. As her once bright eyes start to look gloomy and she begins to feel frightened and confused, real knowledge of fear has been revealed. The helpless fear of her mother Chris (Ellen Burasten), because she sees that her daughter is suffering is nightmares, because no parent can be ready to protect her children from such unthinkable evil. But Chris persists, doing everything he can, even when all the hope is lost. Friedkin enters this unconscious fear of not being able to help a loved one because they spiral, transform and eventually become unrecognizable.

Given the deep understanding of Friedkin for horror (and its many shades), which films of the genre managed to scare? Let's look.

In an interview with ViceFriedkin talked about the reason why he returned to horror throughout his career, highlighting the capacity of the genre to accommodate "high -intensity films for characters who have a back against Wallid and there is no place to walk." This has led to a conversation about movies Whether intimidated him:

"The films that frightened me are" alien "," Psycho ", a Japanese film called" Onibaba "(1964) - one of the worst films I've ever seen. And I loved this recent movie "Babaduk". It surprised me, and I believed it. "

While "Psycho" and foreign "are classic horror offers that cause completely different types of terror," Onibaba "uses a medieval environment to highlight any excess of humanity. "Onibaba" is a little gained taste Even for the worst horror fans, its homelessness is too strong. That said, the film's horror is more pragmatic than fantastic, just like "Babaduk", which causes something strange by rooting it in an experience in a real scenario. When authentic and surreal are mixed stunning horror titles, they are often made, similar to Friedkin's own "exorcist", which progresses because of this duality.

The absence of authenticity can destroy even the most advanced horror films, such as the Guardian, which Friedkin has steered in 1990. Although it is full of potential, the film is joking, without a lack of its glorious 1973 horror title. In addition, the story completely relies on the "Evil Dead"-coded with a platistic horror, but lacks ingenuity (and hoses) to pull it. However, Friedkin returned to his Loveube to a horror based on realism in his 2006 psychological horror horror, which is just as disturbing, intense and claustrophobic as he expected from the "exorcist".