So, here’s the thing… I actually did not know that Turkey had a habit in the ’70s and ’80s of completely remaking American movies because it was cheaper than getting a print shipped over from the United States. That’s just not something I ever thought would be that big of a problem, at least not so much that you’d have to completely remake the entire movie shot for shot, with all new sets, actors, and “special effects”. Nevertheless, that’s what they did, and it was also apparently an easy way to culturally appropriate motion pictures for the Turkish People so that subtitles wouldn’t always be such a bother and so that they could have a slice of cinema that they could call “theirs”, even though it was a blatantly obvious plagiarism at its very worst. This was done with tons of American movies, including Superman, Jaws, Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Rambo, etc. And being the huge success that it was, The Exorcist fell into the category of movies that simply must be remade into a cheap ripoff and shown in every theater in Istanbul. They renamed it Seytan, which means “devil” in Turkish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Now, one would think the first question that arises would be “How can a cinematic masterpiece like The Exorcist be completely remade”? Well, remakes happen all the time, and although it hasn’t been officially remade…yet, The Exorcist definitely has more than its share of sequels and ripoffs. The biggest ripoff of The Exorcist that I’ve seen to date has got to be the movie Abby, a blaxploitation film made in 1974, the same year that Seytan was made. The Exorcist came out in 1973, so these people wasted no time cashing in. And though it’s a very obvious remake of The Exorcist, only with Black people, Abby still has a sense of originality to it that Seytan has absolutely none of. While the demon in Abby got changed to a jive-talking sex demon and the exorcism took place in a discotheque, in Seytan truly nothing was changed. The priest was changed to a doctor but that was only the cultural appropriation at work. The Catholic overtones had to be changed to Islam in order for the storyline to be relevant I guess. Some of the more graphic elements in The Exorcist were tamed down and the language was a little less harsh, but I really think that was because it was just too embarrassing for the actors to recreate. How Linda Blair did it in the first place was a miracle in itself. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even though it sounds like a boring endeavor with an equally boring product, and trust me, in many ways it is, it still has a cult following because of the sheer oddity of it. A curiosity piece that still has to be seen to be believed. The “special effects” that are recreated are a special treat. The head spinning scene was among my favorites. The vomit still looks like pea soup but has a tinge of blue to it. And the scene where Gul (simply Turkish for “girl”) takes a leak at the top of the stairs had me in stitches because the little girls’ legs were so hairy that I really thought it was part of the special effects, even though it wasn’t. As of now, Seytan can be found on YouTube, but finding a version with English subtitles is rare. A copy was released on DVD in 2007 with English subtitles, but the quality of the print is downright deplorable. An English dubbed version exists but given the language that exists in the original, repeating toned-down versions of it just adds to the lunacy of what’s being seen. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Much like when Abby was released, when William Friedkin found out that his movie had been remade\/ripped off AGAIN, he wasn’t happy, but like all things, a bell can’t be unrung. Once a movie is made, it’s gonna get out there, no matter who you have to sue to try and stop it. And now we can find it on free platforms to enjoy making fun of at our leisure. Honestly, if you’ve already seen The Exorcist though, you don’t even need the subtitles, you already know exactly what’s going on and will find every single scene completely foreign yet strangely it’s exactly the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n