SPOILERS AHEAD
Well, since he was already "crazy", he would probably just have stayed locked up until his poor, battered reanimated body died a natural death. Poor Damien.
Even though Morning had successfully exorcised the demon and the Gemini, Karras would still be trapped in his resuscitated corpse, in chains, no less.
Or...perhaps (because it appears that Morning DID actually help expel the demon/the Gemini) ... Perhaps the obvious change in personality brought about by Damien's true return to his true self AS the real Karras might eventually convince the staff that he indeed had been possessed - or at least had experienced the functional equivalent of being possessed, and had recuperated in a state of amnesia followed by abnormal, violent bouts of behavior - only to have returned to himself. Surely Morning and Kinderman would vouch for his true history and true identity.
This is, of course, predicated on the premise that Morning's exorcism worked and the demon/the Gemini were indeed forever banished from Karras' body.
But on the premise that the demon/the Gemini COULD OR WOULD OR DID return, then I can only think about poor Kinderman, refraining from killing Damien, while knowingly condemning his "best friend" to a continuing life in the grasp of the vengeful demon and the Gemini. I doubt Kinderman could have lived with himself after making such a decision. I can think of only three ways "out" for Karras in this "the demon/the Gemini returned to reside in Karras' body" scenario -
1. At some later time, Kinderman simply changed his mind, asked Nurse Allerton to unlock the cell - this time, for the final time - then the door closes, and Kinderman finishes the job precisely because he can't live with his earlier decision. Damien goes on to his reward, or if the demons have returned - see the next point:
2. Morning - although badly wounded - has not died, and he eventually recovers, and he, too, finishes the job by coming back to the cell, this time with Kinderman, to ascertain that the demon had not come back in the elapsed time, and then just stands by as Kinderman kills Karras. Obviously, this would make both parties guilty of murder, at least "as the world judges". But of course, Kinderman is guilty of murder even as the film now stands!
The whole stupid ending, of course, is an artifact of Blatty's studio-enforced rewrite which required an exorcist/exorcism, and was "helped along" by Blatty's solution of having THREE spirits inhabiting Karras' body - Karras himself; the Gemini; and always lurking in the background, the vengeful demon, without whom the entire story could not be.
Apparently Blatty's only solution to Karras' dilemma was to have him killed by Kinderman, his "best friend".
But if you would be interested in seeing it, the following would be my own version of a non-violent ending:
= = = = =
3. As in the current film, Morning has helped Karras to expel the demon/the Gemini. But now Morning is softly moaning on the floor, having survived his abuse by the demon. And now, instead of Karras asking Kinderman to kill him, Kinderman walks up to the cot. Karras looks up at the detective, and says,
"We won, Bill [Karras suddenly gasps]... Can you loosen these straps [Kinderman does, and Karras gently reaches up to touch Kinderman's face.].
"Bill, I'm on my way out... It's my heart - I can feel it. [Karras gasps again.]
"I'm going home now... Look after Fr. Morning... No worries now, Bill. It's all good." [Karras closes his eyes and slumps to one side. He is dead. A single tear rolls down Kinderman's cheek. He moves out of frame to tend to Morning. In the upper middle of the shot the camera rests on the cell windows, and then their light increases until it fills the screen.]
[FADE IN to Damien Karras' grave in Georgetown's Jesuit cemetary showing three mourners: Kinderman, the convalescing Paul Morning in a wheelchair next to him, and next to him Atkins. After a moment Atkins moves away, Morning slowly crosses himself with his free hand (the other arm is in a cast), and Kinderman wheels Morning away from the graveside. A middle distance shot frames the pair as they move away, creating a resonance with the detective's prior friendships with Jesuits Karras and Dyer. A final shot holds on Karras' tombstone, then FADE TO BLACK.
THE END
End Titles]
= = = = =
Is "my" ending melodramatic and cliched? Sure, but it's no worse than the film we have now, where only a legally unexplainable murder can free Karras from his demonic tormenters, and imo, better than Blatty's own solution in the Legion novel, with its weak ending where, upon finding out that his evil father has died - thus depriving the Gemini of his M.O. - the Gemini simply fades away, although not without insisting to Kinderman that he only inhabits Karras' body, and is not really Karras himself.
reply
share
kojak_savalas
8 years ago
I must say I enjoyed reading that. Would have made a great ending.
reply
share
bastasch8647
8 years ago
Thanks for your kind words, kojak. I, too would have preferred a bit longer and emotional ending with more of a sense of closure...
reply
share
apollo86
8 years ago
Such an ending would have been nice to see Bastasch, it would have given the film a bit of breathing room and make things come full circle, especially if it's suggested that Kinderman may strike up a friendship with Morning, harkening back to Merrin's suggestion in the original novel that from these terrible events may come some good.
I get the feeling that the ending of Legion in all it's forms is something Blatty has had trouble with. I've re-read Legion recently, and despite a fantastic premise and intriguing new characters, the novel's ending is a real anti-climax. I never bought that the Gemini just dies because his father dies- surely someone who takes such glee in murdering would keep on going, tormenting his father beyond the grave. It's a fairly short novel as it is, it's a pity Blatty didn't take a bit more time to flesh out a more satisfying climax.
I can count 4 incarnations of Legion, all with different endings:
1. The original novel, where the Gemini summons Kinderman to his cell after his father's death and begs that he tell him that he believes he is the Gemini. Once Kinderman does this, he simply drops dead of heart failure.
2. An early draft of the script (not the shooting script) which also contains the Vennamun childhood scenes which were never shot. This ending is closest to the novel's ending. After the skirmish with Nurse X, with her screaming "the b@stard is dead!", Kinderman goes to visit Patient X only to find that he has died. It's later established that his death was at the exact same time as his father's death.
This also contains a cheap-sounding false scare where Patient X's hands shoot into frame to grab Kinderman by the throat, only for him to realise the hands are his own! It's coda is the burial of Karras's remains, where it's suggested that Kinderman has struck up a friendship with Fr Healy in the same way he did with Karras and Dyer.
3. The "Legion" movie ending is by far the most morally ambiguous, where Kinderman just goes into the cell and blows Patient X away. It is rather unsettling in its abruptness and the many unanswered questions it raises. Just what will happen to Kinderman afterwards? How can he explain killing a man in restraints?
4. The Exorcist 3 ending we all know and love (don't we?) with all the bells and whistles. For all the derision it's received over the years, I still think of the 4 mentioned above, this is the most satisfying and at least gives us a payoff to what the film has been building towards. I like the final shot of Kinderman standing over Karras's gravesite- a wordless scene which was cleverly re-used from the deleted exhumation scene, now with a completely different context. This is one instance where the executives may have had a point!
So from the above, it certainly seems like Blatty had a fair amount of reservations/indecision about how to end the on-screen adaptation!
reply
share
bastasch8647
8 years ago
Great post, apollo. Thanks for laying out all the ending options, they're a fascinating read. So...as you said, the current ending looks to be the best of all of them - the most emotionally satisfying. I certainly don't like the ending where Kinderman just shoots the Gemini/Karras to death - no closure at all. And just having Vennamun drop dead, just beause he finds out that evil dad Karl is dead, is not only anticlimactic, but raises the crucial narrative and theological question of how much or how little power Vennamun had.
My idea is that Vennamun is wholly powered by the vengeful demon, who sets certain parameters for Vennamun's killings, while sometimes permitting Vennamun some "random" leeway. For example, he is sometimes allowed to murder people whose names start with the letter "K" - according to his own wishes and established M.O. - but not all of these fall within the demon's vengeance circle - nurse Keating, Dr. Temple, the anonymous nurse found face-down in her own blood (whose uniform is donned by the mental patient who comes to Kinderman's home) - these satisfy Vennamun's "K" obsession, but they are not direct targets of the demon, who chiefly, at first at least, aims only at those who were involved in the MacNeil case some 15 years earlier. But the demon is ultimately in charge of who/when Vennamun will kill.
That being said, and although it is true to the book, the "weak" ending's depiction of Vennamun dying - apparently having reached satisfaction that evil Karl is dead, and then simply giving up on caring about killing further victims - completely leaves out of consideration the demon's own motivations for using Vennamun as surrogate murderer. That is, had the demon wished to continue using Vennamun as chaos-agent in the world, the demon may not have permitted Vennamun to take "the easy way out" by simply slipping away - as if Vennamun's weak, merely human attitudes and decisions could in any way throw off the demon's power.
Granted, the Gemini did complete the demon's immediate plan of vengeance by killing everyone who had been close to the exorcism: Kanavan, Dyer, Kintry's son (vengeance by proxy), everyone except of course Kinderman.
But one would think - because the demon is the epitome of evil - that it would not relinquish its control over Vennamun until and unless it damn well chose to. As the demon says in the film, "there is so much more killing for my son the Gemini to do..." or words to that effect. The demon still has its hooks into Vennamun and wants to continue using "the body of this saintly priest" to continue committing evil in the world. Which, to me, makes Vennamun's loss of will over his father's death quite insufficient. The demon is still in control, and if it wants Vennamun to continue to do its bidding, it would not let the serial killer off the hook so easily. "Giving up is no excuse, Vennamun!" - I can just hear the demon saying that to its weakling mortal host.
The only reasonable "out", to me, would if Vennamun suddenly died of natural heart failuire, over which the demon had no control...but didn't it?
In the first story, the demon had control over Regan's bodily systems, and in Legion the demon could not only resuscitate Karras' body, it could also restore his brain cells. So, even if Vennamun had a natural heart attack, the demon may have been powerful enough to keep Vennamun alive, and heal his heart "from the inside". Blatty failed to address the demon's fate/destiny, as well as its seeming powerlessness over Vennamun's demise. Why did the demon and its influence fail to make an appearance at the crucial juncture - the glaring crisis - of Vennamun's "defeat" by his father's death, and his apparent decision to die by simply giving up on his killing spree? It seems to me that Blatty copped out when he wrote off the demon by making Vennamun's death equivalent to the demon's disempowerment. He also missed an opportunity for a few last, bitter words from the demon once it realizes and reacts to its defeat...
reply
share
apollo86
8 years ago
Very valid points and much food for thought. It's definitely clear that although the murders are a collaboration, or "pretty little scheme" between the demon and Vennamun, it is definitely the demon running the show- "The Master is throwing me a scrap from his table...", and yes it's mystifying that Blatty would remove the demon from the equation altogether in some of these endings.
It is mentioned on the Blu-ray extras by some interviewees that Blatty's main flaw was approaching the film with the mindset of a novelist rather than a filmmaker, and that led to some problems as he didn't possess the flexibility required of a filmmaker. I got the feeling that he was trying to root Legion (both novel and original movie) more in reality and make it more of a murder mystery, which is fine until the overt references to the first story were made and it's made clear that we are dealing with the same entity, now bent on revenge for being bested by Karras's sacrifice.
It was always going to be difficult for Blatty to have it both ways, and anything other than a demon-centric finale would have been left wanting once the demon had been brought into the plot. This would have alleviated the inconsistencies and outright plot holes you have highlighted. It seems like he was either holding back or second-guessing himself about having the demon be a part of the ending, avoiding it until his hand was forced. Ironically, by the studio going all-in with the demonic stuff, it felt truer and less contradictory than all the other endings.
As overblown as it is at times, the exorcism scene is a worthy addition to the Exorcist mythos and has been somewhat vindicated by the attention the movie has recently received, with most stating their preference for this cut. Over time I have come to enjoy how straight to business and powerful the demon is in this scene, you get the feeling it's been waiting for this and is in no mood to play around.
After the supernatural events leading up to and including Regan's exorcism, it was a great dramatic device used by Blatty towards the end when it became clear that despite the demon's abilities, it was still inhabiting the body of a very mortal little girl who's heart was beginning to fail. This added a new dimension to Karras's turmoil and near breakdown in those final moments. To that end, it's not made clear where the demon goes if the host body dies, or if it can do anything to prevent or prolong this from happening if it really needs to. This is side-stepped in Legion by the demon not being present when Vennamun dies. A wasted opportunity for a proper showdown with Kinderman, and a more satisfying conclusion.
I also think Exorcist 3 is stronger for not trying to explain Vennamun's backstory too much and to try elicit sympathy for him, which the book and early screenplay try to do. In general, I dislike when books and movies try to do this. Prime example being Hannibal Lecter- in the first 2 books he is just plain evil, no explanation as to why is even offered, yet his "otherness" is what is terrifying and compelling about the character. Subsequent books which tried to explain his motivations really sucked the mystique out of the character. A character such as Anton Shigurh from "No Country For Old Men" is really memorable to me for that reason.
In the movie, Vennamun is evil and spite personified, all we're told about his backstory is he hates his father and murders to shame him- that's all we're given and that's all we need, we can fill in the gaps ourselves without it being signposted that Vennamun's abusive childhood led to him becoming a murderer, I think even by 1990 that had become cliche. If he felt compelled to kill just to disgrace his father, he wouldn't take such delight in it and gloat about the skillfull nature of his crimes, even referring to himself as an "artist". He certainly would keep it up as long as he is allowed to by his demonic "arrangements". To that end, the movie as it stands captured the character perfectly, why try to redeem someone who is competlely irredeemable. It at least makes for a hell of an entertaining character!
Well, it says a lot about a work when even the flaws are this fascinating!
reply
share
bastasch8647
8 years ago
You have a tremendous gift for writing - another admirably-done post.
it is definitely the demon running the show- "The Master is throwing me a scrap from his table...", and yes it's mystifying that Blatty would remove the demon from the equation altogether in some of these endings.
... snipped...
I got the feeling that he was trying to root Legion (both novel and original movie) more in reality and make it more of a murder mystery, which is fine until the overt references to the first story were made and it's made clear that we are dealing with the same entity, now bent on revenge for being bested by Karras's sacrifice.
... snipped ...
It seems like he was either holding back or second-guessing himself about having the demon be a part of the ending, avoiding it until his hand was forced. Ironically, by the studio going all-in with the demonic stuff, it felt truer and less contradictory than all the other endings.
I think you just nailed it. Blatty wanted to keep the demon remote and aloof and sort of "above" maintaining a direct presence in Vennamun and in the larger world. This worked in the Legion novel, but as you said, this endeavor was meant for a filmmaker, not a novelist, and the demon should have been somewhat more present and active from the beginning. After all, Blatty forced his own hand when he decided that the original demon was really in the background, manipulating Vennamun and enabling the serial killer to mass-possess "old friends".
As soon as a demon is involved, as soon as its plan for a "scandal" is revealed, we know we are immediately back in the territory of the original novel and the Friedkin film. The author has tipped his hand, and he may as well have gone a little further with the demon's return during the main body of the film...although, as you also said, he does permit the demon to come into full prominence and full play at the film's climax. Thanks, somewhat guiltily and painfully, to Morgan Creek for that modicum, at least.
Exorcist 3 is stronger for not trying to explain Vennamun's backstory too much and to try elicit sympathy
Agreed - in a very real sense, who cares? Many people are abused without becoming dangerous criminals; Vennamun's case falls outside of that circle; but so what? "Sympathy for the [human] devil" is really inappropriate in a film of this kind, which is not about the roots and purposes of a serial killer, but rather about a vengeful demon who controls a serial killer's soul, captures a heroic priest's soul, stuffs them both into the priest's resuscitating body, and proceeds to torment priest and victims via that body and its criminal occupant. The "etiology" of Vennamun's human personality is irrelevant. What is relevant is his new collaboration with the demon and his tenancy, along with Karras, of Karras' reanimated body. His motivations, originally humanly psychotic, are so utterly enhanced by his "alien" connection with the demon that he can now mass-possess victims, throw a police officer around Kinderman's house, and fly-walk Miss Clelia on the hospital ceiling. So this is no longer Vennamun, but "Vennamun-Plus", and his formerly purely human motivations are now at one with the demon's intentions and some of the demon's powers. Flashbacks to Vennamun's childhood abuse would just get in the way of the story's core - as would, probably, the tale of his innocent twin, who is shadowing/haunting Vennamun, trying to whisper a "Please do not kill again" message into the serial killer's ear. Unnecessary, plot-clogging scenarios.
As you perfectly expressed it:
the movie as it stands captured the character perfectly, why try to redeem someone who is competlely irredeemable. It at least makes for a hell of an entertaining character!
Amen to that!
reply
share