Ashley Bell is quite possibly the best thing about The Last Exorcism, the new documentary-ish horror film in theaters about a possessed teenager and the man desperate to prove she isn’t possessed.
Oh! And we interviewed her.
Imagine a young Julie Haggerty, then mix in a cup of Anna Faris and a dash of Gilda Radner, and you have Ashley Bell. Only she isn’t playing funny – she’s terrifying and unnerving as Nell Sweetzer. In fact, there’s been a buzz that she deserves an Oscar Nomination for her performance (stranger things have happened! I mean, remember when Gwyneth Paltrow won for the unwatchable Shakespeare in Love or Kate Hudson for being Goldie Hawn’s daughter? And they didn’t even act well.)
There is something comedienne-y about her, definitely, and perhaps it comes from her mom Victoria Carrol, founder of the Los Angeles comic improve troupe The Groundlings. Though Bell has a real-life comedy appeal to her, her performance in The Last Exorcism is anything but comedic.
Bell makes some really weird, almost inhuman facial expressions throughout the movie. She transforms slowly from a normal teenager to a grotesque demonic creature – with absolutely zero makeup. That’s right. No makeup or visual FX whatsoever aided bell in her transformation. Which is almost unbelievable when you watch the movie. I could swear, several times, that there was some kind of manipulation of the scene with a computer, but no. It’s all her. That’s what makes her, and the film, stand out from all the other horror films out there right now. In order to accomplish this, she watched and listened to hours of tapes of real exorcisms.
“Also I got a chance to talk to people that had actually been around real exorcisms. The fear in their voice – they were actually scared to tell me about them because they thought it would come back to haunt them. I saw it their eyes and I heard it in their voice – the sheer fear surrounding the subject. And when I was watching it. I also had a chance to study a book called The Invention of Hysteria, where people would get out of their human form, and had images running through their heads, they’d be contorting to not look like humans anymore, even though it was real life and they were real people. They wouldn’t look real anymore. So I tried to keep a lot of those images in my head when we were filming.”
She won’t say definitively whether she believes in the possibility of demonic possession based on her research for the role. I’m not sure if this is to stay out of any kind of religious controversy the film might dredge up, or because she doesn’t feel comfortable sharing that kind of personal information with the public, but she will say that she isn’t sure what to think about some of the exorcisms she watched.
“I saw things that were unbelievable, and I heard things that were unbelievable. I had a journal of things written down of the words that would be coming out of their mouths, and it’s not explainable, because what they’d be talking about and where they’d be coming from and the images and the sexual references, was so horrendous. It wasn’t like anything that a human being could come up with. In and out of different languages, of different tongues, and then this noise would come out that would be neither masculine nor feminine, nor animal nor even human. Just primal. Not even that! You don’t know what it is. And that’s when you go, ‘What am I seeing? What am I listening to? Where did this come from?’”
I, for one, would be terrified to watch such a thing, let alone portray it. And I get the feeling Bell was a bit too, and concentrated instead on her acting job so as not to freak herself out.
“Honestly, when I was preparing for it, I just, I wanted to just do my job for the character I was playing. In terms of religious. Whatever Nell would be going through and whatever Nell would be going through, that’s all I thought about.”
Shockingly, all the physical strangeness that accompanies Nell when she is ‘possessed’, including strange neck bulges, backbends, finger manipulation, and an assortment of uncomfortable-looking movements are not computer effects. Bell is extremely flexible and double-jointed and was able to bend over backwards in ways that would probably kill most of us. It’s her physical acting that makes Nell Sweetzer’s scenes so spectacular.
“I loved the physical aspect of this,” she recalls happily. “The night before we shot the second exorcism scene, Daniel [Stamm, the director] asked me if I had any ideas. First of all, that’s awesome, to get asked that. I said I’d been working on the backbend and the splits, can I show you? He said great, let’s put it in! I feel like I’m stuck now. Every time I go into an audition, I have to do a backbend or something."
One of the disappointing aspects of the movie, unfortunately, is that while Nell is the main character of the film, we learn instead what the periphery males in her life feel about her situation, and not what Nell feels. Her father, her brother, and the preacher who arrives to exorcise her are all complex but understandable people with constant communication with the audience. She is an enigma, however. It is never clear, 100%, no matter what, whether Nell is truly possessed, or mentally unstable. And we aren’t supposed to know. Because of this, her true feelings, thoughts, and motivations are hidden from the audience. While frustrating, this plot point makes the film more mysterious and forces you to think and debate the plot long after you see it.
“When I started looking into the character and what had happened to her, Daniel also gave me the hint to focus on the fact that she maybe wasn’t possessed,” says Bell. “That she was going through a breakdown. And I immediately researched post traumatic stress disorder and what goes on with victims in those cases to try to hide that. Honestly, I think that’s cool that the audience is held away from what’s going on. When we were filming it, the question was hovering: when is she actually possessed? When do you really get to see Nell for who she is? And that was the most exciting part of preparing? And getting a chance to figure that out and to play two different characters was fun. Figuring out what Nell hasn’t seen of the world and why she hasn’t been exposed to things in the world.
She seemed to be this girl from the backwoods of Louisiana, and then she transforms to have those two different characters. Daniel told me to play them off each other, and play off the camera and find the moment to look into the camera and the moments not to look – to manipulate people, the audience."
Horror fans will like The Last Exorcism, thinks Bell. “I was so surprised by the final product, what a smart film it is. And I think that’s what Daniel [Stamm] and Eli [Roth] manipulate people. It’s such a smart film. The way Zoltan [Honti, the cinematographer] shot it – it’s a device that’s been used, but the way he used it and the way he figured out how to shoot angles and to see things – it honestly feels like a new type of horror film. I'm honored to be part of a new breed of horror film.”
The sincerity of the movie will really grab you – particularly Bell’s innocent and believable Nell Sweetzer. It’s a creepy movie with a weird twist and some unexpected story arcs.
“I think it is so fascinating that midway through the film you have a preacher who tells my father to get a therapist, and my father is telling the preacher that they need an exorcism. The same things Louis [Nell’s father] says in the film feel true and feel real to people who have experienced exorcisms in real life.”
You can watch Bell next in the upcoming comedy Stay Cool. Until then, catch her performance. It’s a good one.
Comments
I thought Ashley Bell was AMAZING I really felt for her character and when she did all that double-jointed stuff I was like "WTF!?" creeped me out totally. I enjoyed the movie a lot, more than I did Paranormal Activity, although I felt it kind of failed in some places. Especially when Cotton went into the house and it was decorated with demonic symbols there was even a anarchy symbols I thought that was hokey as all get out.
I thought Jennifer Carpenter acting in Quarantine was terrible and she totally over-acted. She was decent in the Exorcism of Emily Rose.
SPOILER TALK::::
Okay, Art, I am SO baffled by the ending and STILL don't know what to think about it. Like, it was 'so sudden'.
In the press day interview, Eli Roth seemed to think that the Devil himself had set up this 'perfect' situation, complete with satanists and all, to try to convince Cotton of his existence, because early in the film Cotton declares that he doesn't believe in Satan.
I don't know if the film really conveys that very well.
But supposedly, she IS posessed and the townsfolk ARE satanists and finally, at the finale, Cotton believes for the first time ever.
And we aren't supposed to know whether he lives or dies. Or who put the film together and put music to it.
That's the official story, I guess, from the producer. I personally thought that it was the wrong way to end it. I would have at least liked to see a build up to the satanists or a ten minute ending that didn't involve a camera falling to the floor.
Heidi, I totally agree that Bell's performance is amazing and ground-breaking - and who would have thought anything in a new movie about exorcism would ever be considered ground-breaking? She's a marvel to watch. I had heard you and Stacie talk about the film on The Scare-ening, so I knew that Bell did all of her own possession "work" going in - and that made her performance all the more brilliant. Your point about the audience not being let in more on Nell's point of view is a good one; I think the director was trying to keep her enigmatic so that we, like Cotton, can never get a handle on her ... but some more time with her in un-possessed mode would have been welcome.
I have to say, though, that while I loved the fist 90% of the film, I was let down by the finale.
SPOILERS AHEAD:
Why did the film suddenly turn into a 70s devil flick, complete with red robes, sacrifice, and chanting? And why did the leader of the red-robed chanters have to be the local pastor? Ugh. We've seen that so, so many times before. For most of the film, we get a new and very compelling perspective on a familiar story - and then they sink into total cliche for the conclusion. (I will say, though, that the last shot was effective and surprising.) Had a lesser film led up to this conclusion it wouldn't have bugged me - after all, there's a place for 70s devil-movie cliches. I was just disappointed because I liked the rest of the film so much.
What did you think?
I like Emily Rose quite a bit. I haven't read any of the books but from what I read on the internet about it the movie seemed to be a pretty good accounting. I listened to the actual recordings of the exorcism and they are freaky as hell.
As far as Kate Hudson I've only seen her in one movie and I thought she was beautiful, sexy and gave a great performance. My favorite rock movie Almost Famous. I gather she did a lot of chick flicks because that's one genre I avoid like the plague.
Kate Hudson won an Oscar? Really????
Living testimony to why the Academy Awards suck and I refuse to pay attention to them anymore. And that's even if she was nominated.
And I have to see The Exorcism of Emily Rose, only for Carpenter's performance. She was outstanding in Quarantine.
LOL she's pretty damn good! I concede that Jennifer Carpenter was very very excellent as well. It is a tough call between these two performances.
I mean, remember when Gwyneth Paltrow won for the unwatchable Shakespeare in Love or Kate Hudson for being Goldie Hawn’s daughter? And they didn’t even act well.\
SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE was brilliant in every way but Gwyneth's lame-ass performance.
And Kate Hudson sucked a fat dong in that lame-ass movie. It was a melodramatic rose-coloured sack of shit and she has sucked ass in every movie ever since.
She can't be as good as Jennifer Carpenter was in that lame-ass pile ofmade-up bullshit THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE.