An in depth look at the killers motives and a semi review of the movie
I watched the film again(bought it, actually).
Awhile back, I started a thread that began this long debate with Norse-Viking about whether the film was anti-Christian or not. He claimed the ending bit was a slam on Christianity, I thought it was simply showing a more humane side of the character.
I'm more convinced Norse-viking is wrong about the Priest stuff before(although my view probably isnt right either). In reality, this film isnt any more anti-catholic than "The Mist"(which has some crazy Christian chick). Early on, its suggested the killer is Schizophrenic, hence, he is already insane before he is a Priest.
This is supported by the fact the Priest seems to be going both ways. During one scene near the end, he almost incriminates himself by supporting the decision to ask the daughter. A great scene is when the reporter offers him the Cigarette . He didnt want it, but gave in, possible alluding to the fact he doesnt know the difference between right and wrong.
My personal opinion is that he has multiple personalities. The better personality probably didnt know what he was doing until later in the movie.
Why?
THe first 3 kids are killed in a similar fashion. They make a point the final kids murder was different from the others. Also, his responces to the deaths are radically different. When he's first introduced when I believe the 2nd kid is killed, he is surprisingly calm.
However, when the final kid is killed, he is crying. Oddly, in a flashback at the end of the movie there appears to be tears coming out of his eyes(but he isnt really crying). But earlier, when the police see him at the crime, he is crying heavily and they seem to think its genuine.
So in my opinion, the better side eventually gave into the evil side(probably when he found out the kids were perverts before the final kid is killed). When he intends to kill the sister, he is doing it out of greed(so he isnt caught), but is deluding himself of his intentions.
So the final result is that he is simply clinically insane. It doesnt make sense if this is an allegorical anti-Christian film simply due to the Priests reasons. Most Priest are not insane.
Also, its KIND OF possible that the Priest was influence by the witch. If so, then he wasn't insane, but was possessed. This would make sense, as she uses her spell at the same time the Priest begins killing.
However, the Priest mentions strange things started happening when the hot chick shows up. So it was probably a ploy to throw us off.
I liked the movie even more this time. It had a Dario Argento-type mystery but retained Fulci's raw vision. The score was great and the cinematography was amazing.
The acting was okay........some do well, others not. The lead character did fine, but he was kind of boring........I didnt buy the two leads deciding it was the PRiests Mother who was the killer because it was too much of a stretch and went against the fact the reporter was supposed to be intelligent.
I also didnt like.....any of the characters. I give props to the PRiest for simply being a well-developed character, although he was evil. The lead was bland. The main gal was hot but somewhat of a whorish pedophile. The witch had some bad overacting moments and really wasnt any better than the Priest. The kids were all bratty. The cops didnt do much for me either.
On the witch, its funny because she is so much like the Priest, if not worse. She was mad, but not insane. However, I got the impression at the end that she regretted her prior actions. (based on her final look at the little girl). Even though she didnt technically kill the kids, she had a killers intent and thought she did.
It was a good film, better than most of Fulci's stuff. I personally think "City of the Living Dead" is his best film(visually), but this would be up there,
"I hate PG-13 horror flicks"- THIS IS MY SIG GENIUSES!