The Possession of Joel Delaney

I recently just heard of this 70's cult-classic, and some were trying to compare it to or put it in the same realm as the 1973 masterpiece "The Exorcist." Let's be honest here...the ONLY thing that "The Possession of Joel Delaney" and "The Exorcist" have in common is that both do deal with the subject of possession. Other than that "Possession of Joel" does not even come close to an ink-ling of being in the same realm as "The Exorcist."

However, this 70's horror flick is pretty good for low-budget and the topic it deals with. There are plenty of bizarre and freaky moments, and the slow mental collapse/possession of 'Joel' was amazingly portrayed by a very young Perry King! Shirley MacLaine also gives a very excellent performance as the somewhat weird and mentally troubled 'Norah'.

But, the actor I had the most respect for, and thought truly had to go through a humiliating/horrifying experience, and handled it professionally (especially at his young age at the time) was David Elliot. He was the young 13 year old son of MacLaine and had to strip naked (exposing himself entirely) after the possessed Joel forced him to dance naked around the house to terrify him. That had to be embarrassing and I'm surprised they allowed it...but he handled the situation and that scene like a pro. This scene is also somewhat shocking and makes this film remembered among horror movie fans.

Overall...again don't expect "The Exorcist", but it is frightening and the character development, filming locations, etc... are excellent! This is a must have for horror fans/collectors!

"The Possession of Joel Delaney" (1972) is a story of demonic possession, much on the order of "The Exorcist," but in many ways more believable. A young man, played by Perry King, has his body taken over by the soul of a serial killer. His sister, Shirley McLaine in one of her better performances, tries to find out why his behavior has so drastically changed, and her quest takes her into the Voodoo underground of Manhattan's Spanish Harlem. The plot develops slowly but builds to a powerful, unexpected finish in which McLaine and her two young children are lured to a secluded beach house and threatened by a knife wielding Perry. This includes one of the most shocking scenes involving a minor in American movies. I will not disclose the details of what the actor, ten year old David Elliot, is subjected to but it probably could not be filmed today in our more uptight, politically correct times, at least not with the same directness.

"The Possession of Joel Delaney" is not a better film than "The "Exorcist," but it is well worth watching and does manage to scare us without the use of gimmicks such as pea soup and revolving heads.

Potent, occasionally disturbing, but ultimately uncomfortable thriller from Ramona Stewart's novel concerns an upper-crust New Yorker (Shirley MacLaine) who reunites with her vivacious brother, but soon begins to suspect he's either on drugs, insane, or worse...it's worse. Unapologetic film dives in where most movies would fear to tread, and that's both pro and con. Turns out Joel Delaney has become involved in a voodoo cult and is now possessed by the soul of a vicious killer. Final moments with MacLaine and kids at the beach, cornered by Perry King's dangerous Delaney, are quite nasty...but you have to admire that final plot-twist, handled with unashamed bravado. I would recommend the picture to connoisseurs of the offbeat, even if the film is actually rather pointless, never dealing in depth with its own subject matter. ** from ****

Nora Benson (Shirley MacLaine) is a spoiled socialite who finds herself caught up in a supernatural nightmare, when she starts to believe that her brother (Perry King) is possessed by the spirit of a dead murderer.

Ms. MacLaine is fantastic in her role, bringing a complexity to a part that could have easily been played as an over-the-top parody.

THE POSSESSION OF JOEL DELANEY is an excellent example of early 1970's cinema at its dark, politically incorrect best. This was a time when it seemed as though all directors were taking risks and trying new things. This film takes horror in a direction that few, if any, would attempt today...

Originally when wide screen films were converted to vhs for home viewing on a square TV, they would cut off some of the image on either side, and restore some of the top and bottom. This is why often you might see a boom mic in the top of the frame on TV that wasn't there in the theatrical version.with this film, this process dramatically altered the content of this film in a way not intended by the director or producers of the film. In the final scene there is considerably more graphic child nudity not seen in the theatrical version, because it happened below the intended cut off line. I'd imagine most of the negative reviews come from those seeing the vhs version. For a time, vhs would be the best chance of seeing it. But now, it's dvd or streaming and will most likely be the original theatrical version. So a lot of those bad reviews really don't apply anymore. This film is rather dated, but still a decent 70s scary film with some great actors. So ignore the reviews.