Voting
Quality
Age
Show More...
 
Voting
Quality
Age

Сomments

its fun to pretend demons are real. it is sorta sad that the real anneliese and the priests spent 8 months trying to drive out things that dont exist. the poor girl needed psychological help... not medieval witch doctors...
The Exorcism of Emily Rose was inspired by the 1976 real-life story of Anneliese Michel, a young woman from Germany whom priests in Wurzburg spent eight months attempting to exorcise demons from her body. This is my kind of horror, a thinking flick. There won't be any head rotating 360 degrees in this one; it's a fresh mix of scares and intellect, with spiritual questions at hand. Enjoyed this one a lot.

Hmm, True story I think not.

Almost all of these movies are actually based off of the possession of Anneliese Michel, a woman from germany.

The Exorcism of Emily Rose: Wow! First off, I'd just like to say that I'm very surprised at how much I enjoyed this movie! I was expecting it to be ok.... but it was great! The movie is, genuinely, scary - which is a very hard thing for a film to do and still carry a PG-13 tag. Actually, scratch that, making a scary movie is a very hard thing to do. The great thing about this movie is that it doesn't really try to be scary at all. It doesn't try to force cheap thrills down your throat over and over, it really carries a sense of eeriness and suspense that is unlike any film I've seen in a while. Which brings me to my next point, this movie is unlike any other I've ever seen! It could be described as a courthouse/horror/thriller. I've never seen this combonation tried before, and it's quite cool that it all worked out. Now, don't get me wrong the continuity was great, the filmaker made the backstory of Emily Rose integate very well with the courtroom and the film as a whole.... *but* I have to admit that I felt a little letdown at some points when I was really scared and tense on one scene then it switched back to the courtroom. Trust me, that's not a huge deal at all, because the courtroom was also pretty tense, but I thought I'd just say. Really though, I'm looking forward to the release of this film to the general public so I can see it again! I really liked it a lot. That's why I'm giving it an astounding 90/100! Yeah! It got bonus points because I got scared in two different scenes! That's unheard of! Good day.

90/100
Was dragged kicking and screaming to see The Exorcism of Emily Rose. Neither liked nor disliked the movie. Didn't freak me out, either. Sorry. Don't have anything to say.


This one was just... not there. It came close to hitting that elusive home run a few times and appeared to have all of the appropriate elements, but just failed to hit its mark.

Laura Linney was fabulous. She's such a beautiful, talented, under-utilized actress. She was great. Tom Wilkinson was stellar in his role. Jennifer Carpenter absolutely stole the show in her performance as Emily Rose. This movie has the scare-factor of it being based on something real going for it.

Yet somehow, this movie just misses. I can't describe it any better than it just missing it's mark. I understand the necessity to treat the subject matter delicately because of its balance between religion and science, but the script ultimately fails.

The scares are good, but don't seem to quite live up to their buildups and are far and few between. At times, the movie felt like a court room drama, or more similar to an extended episode of The Practice than a feature film.

I noticed the marketing department has already switched gears and stopped billing this as a "horror" but rather a "thriller". A subtle difference, that MAKES a difference. While the movie isn't horrible, it doesn't do the performances within any justice.
A shocking thing happened after viewing this horror/drama masterpiece...I was actually thinking it was the best movie of the year. That would mean...it's better than "SinCity"...but the weirdest thing is- I'm still thinking about it. "The Exorcism of Emily Rose" is a nearly perfect film- a film that I will remember for a very long time. It is a harrowing, shocking, terrifying, a terribly sad motion picture event that will make you question your own faith- and will definitely ask you to ask yourself some hard questions.

The story follows the events after the death of Emily Rose, taking place during the trial with flashbacks of Emily during her stages of possible possession...I say possible because the film presents the story in two views at the same time. You can see everything from the faith point of view- or the science point of view. And you walk out of the film and you still don't know which side to take...or you will. And that's how you may be totally freaked out by this film, or if you're not scared to death, then you'll be enthralled by the exciting courtroom drama that makes up most of the film.

Jennifer Carpenter stars as Emily Rose, and if this wasn't a horror film then she'd be nominated for a Best Supporting Actress Oscar next February. Too bad she'll be overlooked (hope I'm wrong), but Laura Linney is the star of the show- and her performance is so good, it too may be overlooked by the Academy, but it will leave an impression in audience' minds. Carpenter is absolutely effective here, being sweet and innocent when needed, and absolutely horrified the rest of the time- it's a harrowing, terrific performance. Linney too, is absolutely believable and effective here in one of her best performances to date. Tom Wilkinson plays Father Moore very effectively too, although he SLIGHTLY gets overshadowed by the other two.

The film is incredibly scary and sad at the same time. Emily's possession begins one night alone in her dorm room, and it is one of the scariest, most nerve-racking sequences I've ever seen. After that, there are more than several scenes (set in a hospital room, another dorm room sequence, a church, a classroom (brrrrr.....) and a barn) that are absolutely horrifying- pushing the lines of that PG-13 rating this film amazingly received. But amidst that, the courtroom drama is tense and sad, and you never know what the result will be. This is a film that defies conventions...a truly original work of solid filmmaking.

This is one of the best and most original films of the year- filled with gut-wrenching heart and terrifying horrors, it is probably the first must-see film since "Batman Begins" back in June...so see this brilliant film, and make sure you're in bed by 3 a.m. (****)
The Exorcism of Emily Rose



Review by Eric Robinette



Grade: B+



Starring: Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, Campbell Scott, Jennifer Carpenter, Colm Feore, Mary Beth Hurt, Shohreh Aghdashloo



Written by Paul Harris Boardman, Scott Derrickson



Directed by Scott Derrickson



If the makers of the misbegotten "Exorcist" sequels had asked the question, "What would have happened if the priest were put on trial," they might have made a movie as strong as "The Exorcism of Emily Rose."



Before I saw the film, I wondered why Oscar-nominated actors Tom Wilkinson, Laura Linney and Shohreh Aghdashloo were drawn to what looked like a fairly low-rent shocker. My brow furrowed when I saw that co-writer/director Scott Derrickson's most notable credit was the screenplay to the "Urban Legends" sequel.



Ironically, "Exorcism's" screenplay turns out to be its best asset. In a Hollywood rarity, the screenplay is actually stronger than the direction.



Very loosely based on an actual incident, the movie reveals early on that Emily (Jennifer Carpenter) died after an exorcism by her priest, Father Moore (Wilkinson), went awry. The priest is charged with negligent homicide, but insists to his agnostic defense attorney Erin (Linney) that if he can take the stand and tell Emily's story, he could be acquitted.



Was Emily really possessed by multiple demons, or was she a psychotic who could have been cured medically? When you get down to it, the movie calls the very existence of God into question.



That being the case, those who come to the looking for devilish cheap thrills may be disappointed, not least because too many young horror "fans "these days have so much irony in their blood that they think it's hysterical to see someone thrashing about in unbearable pain. Those who find "The Exorcist" funny are urged to take their thoughtless laughter elsewhere.



In fairness, the possession scenes are the least imaginative, filled with second-rate effects that make some characters look like models for the Edward Munch "Scream" painting. Derrickson does doesn't play with perception of reality enough.



Evocative photography by Clint Eastwood's cinematographer, Tom Stern, helps make up for Derrickson's lack of visual imagination, but I wish the director had made the prosecution flashbacks look more like evidence of mental illness, rather than making it obvious that demons were the culprits. That would have made the film's mystery all the more intriguing.



Unsurprisingly, the cast gives the film most of its power. Linney and Wilkinson are especially moving when their opposing beliefs clash, and their strong dynamic propels the film. Aghdashloo, who was sensational in "House of Sand and Fog," is a fascinating presence as an expert defense witness who studies possession.



To Derrickson's credit, the movie doesn't take sides on religious issues. While the movie clearly sympathizes with Emily and Father Moore, it does not ask us to believe that possession is real, or that exorcism is a legitimate remedy. It does ask us to consider that a girl suffered terribly, and that what you believe may not be so important as how you believe it.



For that, "The Exorcism of Emily Rose" is haunting in the best way.

.
OK, I liked it. But it missed as often as it hit with its various devices.

If you're expecting The Exorcist, this isn't it. If you're hoping for Law and Order... well, the lawyers are no Sam Watterson, but they're better than Elisabeth Rohm.

What the film does well... it balances the flash backs (I hope you at least have a clue as to what the movie is about before you read this) very well... so that what you see can support both the prosecution and the defense. Is she possessed? Is she medically ill? You see both sides with pretty much the same take on the flashbacks. I thought it worked very well.

Where it missed... after the movie was said and done, I found I was on one side the argument. The movie didn't balance the case well enough for me to stay on the fence and spend time thinking/talking about the movie. When the movie was over, it was over for me. On to the next one...