I have, just because of the cover photograph, picked up this film in the video store many times, but never, until tonight, actually rented and watched it. I was somewhat disappointed. Blatty had a good premise and, it would seem, some good acting talent to work with, but the film did not live up to its potential. The DVD copy I rented also contained a brief 'featurette' on the film which included some comments by Blatty. It is actually this minutes long piece of video that fuels many of my objections to the film. This little piece made me respect the film less. Blatty's pseudo-intellectualism and 'logic' about the necessity of a benign deity in order to explain the 'mysteries of the universe' may, somewhere, although I haven't seen it, find some level of supportive argument, but such an argument is certainly not contained within The Ninth Configuration.
The film itself was quite interesting in ways - the cinematography, the performances given by Keach and Wilson were impressive and, as I said, the premise of the film is interesting. I understand its appeal, but, despite what Blatty might believe, the point he thinks the film makes and the conclusions he seeems to the think we are forced to draw from the film are both equally full of holes. The Ninth Configuration only skims the surfaces of the characters and, in order to even come close to adequately addressing what Blatty claims to be aiming for, this is entirely insufficient. We need to know more about the characters - their motives, their desires, their histories, their values, their metaphysical and epistemological beliefs and more if we want to even scratch the surface of what this film wants to hint at, or so the director's comments in the 'featurette' would suggest.
That sounds like a lot to ask of a film, doesn't it? Well, Blatty seems to write cheques his film can't cash.
As for the film itself, I think it is worth watching because it is, for the most part, entertaining. The style is enjoyable, the performances are quite good and the story itself is a good one, full of possibilities. Unfortunately, the film does not, in my view, realize its potential, but it should, at the least, spark some interesting conversation.
reply
share
JimSpy
20 years ago
Callicles - I'm sorry you found the movie disappointing. I can almost guarantee it's because you watched the featurette of Blatty spouting off. You sound like a seasoned cinema veteran, I would think you would have learned by now never to listen to directors who take their movies too seriously. Most filmmakers are so taken with their own talents that they go "over the top" in discussing the "meaningfulness" of their films. I think Coppolla is a good example as well. "Apocolypse Now" was a good film; but I once heard Coppolla waxing philosophical about it, making it sound as if the film was the moral equivalent of the Second Coming.
Now I haven't seen the Blatty interview, but I can tell you that, as an atheist, I was able to filter out the theological subtext of the film (while still enjoying the repartee on good vs. evil) and still found this to be an outstanding work, from a pure filmmaking point of view. Sure, the theology was crapola, but to me, ALL theology is crapola, so I take it in stride. If the Blatty blather made you expect some kind of mind-bending epiphany on God or the nature of existence, of COURSE you would be disappointed; no film will ever deliver that. To be honest, I found it a good "try"; Keach's line, "If you think God doesn't exist because of all the bad things, why don't you think he DOES exist because of all the good things?" was not bad for pop-theology (until you remember that an all-good deity is not supposed to allow the existence of evil in the first place.)
Do yourself a favor, watch it again, and again. Everyone on this board will tell you that they gain new perspective on the film with each re-screening.
Sorry for the length, and for the delay; I only today found out how I can review my past postings on IMDB. So I'm playing catch-up.
==JJS==
reply
share