The Exorcism of Emily Rose

Within the genre, this is quite an atypical, one could even say original, horror thanks to the combination of a classic theme of demonic possession with a courtroom drama, where the scriptwriter and director provocatively work with the possibility of the existence of irrational supernatural evil in our material world within the framework of the trial. Flashbacks, editing, and music help create a truly oppressive atmosphere, and the excellent cast helped create an above-average genre film. I admit that I had a bit of a problem with the irrational level embedded in our modern world when the film does not appear as a stylized horror fairy tale, but as a story from reality, due to my enlightenment and modernity as a child. Overall impression: 75%. (18/04/2009)

A tedious battle between science and faith set in a courtroom. It’s a pretty long film – by the end I was looking at my watch – the events in the courtroom are quite boring because they are very predictable (you can figure out exactly how the case will develop and what the verdict will be). What is a little bit better are the flashbacks showing a still alive Emily. The entire film has three mildly scary scenes, very little for an almost two-hour runtime, which is a real shame because they are very effective and intense. Formally speaking, there’s not much to reproach: the actors handle their roles perfectly, the characters don’t do anything stupid and the direction is good enough. 70% (20/01/2008)

The Exorcism of Emily Rose serves up proper portions of impressive chills, for which – as in The Grudge – composer Christopher Young deserves a lot of credit. However, these very effective elements of modern horror are overshadowed by a courtroom drama that begs to be handled more intelligently and in a more dignified manner. The theme, which elevates the film above the current crowd of mediocre horror movies, is used only superficially by the filmmakers, who thus miss the mark. In comparison with Friedkin’s The Exorcist, this film is merely a skillfully shot diversion based on a mediocre screenplay. (27/10/2005)

Scott Derrickson kicks William Friedkin's ass with the exorcism scene alone, but the positives don't end there. It is true that the courtroom intrigue is routine, but it’s not going to offend the more modest viewer, and thus the film’s main asset is the actual rendezvous with the forces of darkness. It’s filmed so perfectly that the producers of any ghost story remakes should get a little technical training from Derrickson. Derrickson does good work with the camera, music, and sound, meaning that many passages are very pleasantly chilling. Of the actors, the famed Tom Wilkinson clearly carries the film, but it's Jennifer Carpenter's creation that makes my chin drop. It's unfortunate about the cautious approach to the Church itself, more controversy would not have been a bad thing. Although it is a fact that it’s better this way, rather than poser shouting into the dark, as we see elsewhere. The result is a surprisingly clever and skillful film that won't cause you to have sleep problems, it will in a sense please you. (23/07/2008)

I've got two major gripes with films centered around exorcism themes. Firstly, I'm not a fan of the various religions and churches depicted. Secondly, ever since Max von Sydow tried to dodge streams of pea soup, it seems like filmmakers haven't really come up with anything new (unless we count the use of CGI on the possessed). This particular film wasn't exactly a horror movie, more like a courtroom drama with added exorcism flashbacks, with the courtroom scenes being the saving grace. Unfortunately, the trial concluded with a verdict that seemed like a clever cop-out. So, for me, the film ended halfway through; I was entertained and yet not quite satisfied, and my rating reflects this mixed bag. It wasn't a terrible movie, but it had way too many flaws to leave a lasting impression on me. / Lesson learned: If you have a fit in a deeply religious family, you're in trouble. (30/07/2023)