The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005)
User ReviewsAdd a Review
Avoiding nothing is not avoidance
Escaping impossibility is accepting possibility
Accepting possibility is impossibility
Impossible maturity is immaturity
Cowardice is acceptance not so as to be immature
Cowardice is acceptance so as to be mature
Cowardice is acceptance creating maturity
Acceptance creating maturity is not creating maturity
Cowardice is creating immaturity
Bravery is not creating maturity
Bravery is to not be responsible for maturity
Bravery is to be responsible for immaturity
Immaturity is the bravery of responsibility
Maturity is the bravery of no responsibility
No responsibility is no concern
No concern is no elsewhere
Evolution is the bravery of no elsewhere
Elsewhere is the cowardice of evolution
Evolution hurts itself by indulging in elsewhere
If you haven't read up on the true story behind the film of the exorcism of Annelise Michel in Germany I highly recommend you look into it and then see if this exorcism needed to be defended. Or any other exorcism done on a mentally ill or "disobedient" young person.
Beyond that the film is cliché and dull. It's also not scary at all despite some good acting by the woman who plays Emily Rose. I'm disappointed Laura Linney did this film.
In today's world many mental diseases come as if they have got a hand of God in them. I believe that to be true. I also believe that more than procedures like exorcism; modern medical science can provide better relief. The only tough part is the time required to become well under guidance of these medicines, it's as if one goes through hell. One thinks it's better without medical treatment.
The incidence of timing 3:00 happened in my case too. The watch stopped. The only difference was it was day. I was feeling supernaturally special, but it was not real. Whatever I have experienced has let me known that parallel realms exist.
This wasn't anywhere as bad as it could've been. The film is really split into two halves here with this one being basically helped greatly by its really good possession and shock scenes. The opening scene that sets her up to becoming possessed is one of it's best sequences, as the long hallway and the unearthly voices floating around give it an unearthly feel while the first scene in the classroom where she sees a demonic face appearing in the window through a cloud of mist and turns around to see a student's face turn into a distorted demon's face giving off an unearthly roar makes it quite shocking. Running out into the rain and seeing more demonic faces give off the same unearthly roar is a bit clichéd, but it still helps to sell the mood while the finale in the church giving this a quite creepy conclusion. The different manners of how she's become afflicted are quite memorable moments with the frenzied bug-eating, speaking in tongues or just contorting her body into such impossible positions that it really becomes obvious something is wrong with her, and the long, suspenseful and chilling exorcism is the film's selling point, coming off with any number of creepy ideas and scenes in such a drawn-out style is one of the best scenes in the film. Otherwise, beyond the shocks and the exorcism, there isn't much else to like about it. Therefore, everything else in it doesn't really work which is only relegated to the courtroom battle drama. It's marketed as being a supernatural possession film, and the best moments come from those scenes, but the fact that the majority of the film is a courtroom battle with the supernatural elements coming in the form of flashbacks is a real misstep and is likely to confuse those coming in expecting the other kind of film. It's not that they're boring or anything, it's just that it's out of nowhere that it becomes that way, and it can be a disappointment. The fact that these are slow and really long don't help matters, extending this out far longer than it should. This could've easily been an hour and a half, or maybe a little longer, but the two hours running time forces it to keep the courtroom antics going for no reason other than to extend the running time. A few extraneous scenes could've been snipped as well, including the introductory scenes at the bar that repeat information we already know and also keep the running time going, and most of the time simply elicit a feeling of wanting to move along and get to the good scenes. These really harm the film.
Rated PG-13: Language, Mild Violence and intense demonic and spiritual themes.
A debate between science and religion In my opinion, this film is one of the great ones. Of course that depends on your philosophy and beliefs. I am an agnostic, meaning I am not at all affiliated with any religions but I like to keep an open mind about the those phenomena that are still unexplained to humans.
I am also a fan of science and well-read in psychiatry and clinical psychology. While definitely not a fan of any man-created religion, I do keep an open mind about what could be on the other side.
As a horror film fan, I had been waiting to watch this film. I admire Shohreh Aghdashloo (although she was given a small role here) and didn't know Jennifer Carpenter at the time. I was at first disappointed because I was expecting typical horror entertainment. However I realized that although there are a few creepy scenes, these are mostly realities that many schizophrenics have to deal with often. Many of them live this in their crises when they hallucinate, become delusional, etc. It's such a patient who is the most scared, not those who observe her. The film shows us how scary it is for her.
Now the question remains, whether this is a mental illness or has roots in "Evil", as defined by the Christian tradition. During the entire time the viewer is searching for this answer, and at the it remains open-ended, thus giving much credit to science and psychiatry (explaining that in this modern age there should be medical intervention) but at the same time leaving the door open for the paranormal.
I admired Jennifer Carpenter after this film. She usually does not play the role of the typical Hollywood glam girl who are dime a dozen. This girl can act. If you have seen the Dexter series, you will know what I mean. All the actors are great. All in all, a very deep film and has you wondering after it has ended, if at all.
I think if they did a film based on Michel, it would've been better!
I don't understand why it has great reviews cause it really in my opinion, doesn't deserve any. They should've keep their facts right, not fantasy! I wouldn't consider this the best horror out there in my opinion :/
This is a film made in an original way: based on the traditional formula of exorcisms movies, it innovates basing on the consequences of the exorcism. Its not for all audiences, contains some shocking scenes for sensitive people, but is much lighter (visually) than other similar films. Terror is more psychological than visual, although Jennifer Carpenter, who plays Emily, be excellent in the production of frightening scowls and grimaces. The film manages a very open attitude towards the exorcism, as the court exposing arguments for and against what happened. The film doesn't assume that the devil exists, although its understood throughout the film.
The interpretation of Jennifer Carpenter is regular, only highlights in the horror scenes, contrasting with the good interpretation of Laura Linney (who plays Erin, a skeptical defense lawyer confronted with something beyond her understanding) and Tom Wilkinson, who gave life to a priest visibly guided by faith rather than reason. Unfortunately, almost all the other characters are mere props, never deserve more development. Another major flaw of this film are the special and visual effects. In certain scenes, they result very well and can scare enough but, at other times, they are so weird, so poorly made that seem ridiculous, especially when we see it a second time. The soundtrack sought to accompany the film, but its not different from what we hear in hundreds of other horror movies.
I'm a big believer in the supernatural and I've studied it a lot in the past. What is presented here is a very believable, very frightening account of demonic possession. I honestly believe that this really happened. Although the film is lengthy and slow-moving, it's never boring and that's because somebody had the great idea of including harrowing flashbacks of the possessed Emily during the courtroom case. It really works, breaking up the courtroom tension, and adding in genuine frights and chills along the way too.
The movie is topped off with a fantastic cast working at the top of their game. I don't believe Laura Linney has ever been better than she has here, and her portrayal of a woman with integrity is fine. Tom Wilkinson makes us believe he is the disturbed priest with every drop of sweat that comes from him. As for Jennifer Carpenter, well she should be going places with her portrayal of the tormented Emily here, and I hope she doesn't suffer the same kind of career nosedive as Linda Blair did in the '80s.
It's just a bland propaganda vignette that rips off the Exorcist a bit, but not too much - so that the Christian crowd who for some reason came to see this "horror" flick wouldn't be freaked out too much, so none of that satanic puke and definitely no mothers sucking cocks in Hell.
This movie is 1,5 hours of pandering to the American Baptist prosecution complex. The movie leaves no suspense, no place for doubt, it just states straight away: yes, this is supernatural, no question about it, these guys are right, these are wrong.
And portraying lawyers only in the cocktail party setting... my god, could this be any more cringe worthy?
Meanwhile, the exorcism flashback scenes are made disturbing not by CGI or jump scares, but by a turned-up-to-11 performance by the bizarrely underrated Jennifer Carpenter. Honestly can't understand why she hasn't been featured in more.
I liked it, despite the eyeroll-inducing ending, but if you're looking for a scary, exorcism-based horror, though, this isn't it.
I like that the story of Emily is revealed step by step through the eyes of different people and from the distance. It kinda gives the authenticity to the film and the experience of the devil possession. Especially when we know that the film is based on the true story ! The girl who plays Emily is brilliant. The scenes were really 'exorcism worthy' especially those where her body is twisted in unnatural ways. Of course, I know that many special effects were probably used to convey that state of stiff possession, but her face expressions were on point with the body. All other actors in the film were on point with their roles.
I wish that maybe the dark presence was much more exploited in the case of the defence lawyer or the priest. But maybe it would take an hour more to the story.
All in all, I would recommend this film to horror/exorcism/supernatural lovers. Eight from me.
Recently I popped it in again and re-watched it. And I was really happy that my choice a few years ago wasn't bad (lol!). Because this movie is an absolute gem amongst horror.
It steers clear from typical horror movie because it doesn't follow the usual "build-up-halfway-throw-everything-after-half-time" strategy. The movie is based around a true controversial story. It's unusually is a court drama-esque horror which accounts the case of manslaughter of the eponymous girl against a priest. Dealing with faith vs doubt, it highlights a lawyer's internal conflict on being doubtful yet defending a priest. The horror in this case is shown throughout the movie. It is overall very intelligently made.
But the unusual setting or the plot isn't what makes this movie great. The strong performances by both leads (Laura Linney and Jennifer Carpenter) is what sets this cut above the usual horror movies out there. Linney does well here, her character's internal conflicts on what to believe, her agnostic approach to defending a priest are carried out great but Carpenter is the true hero of this movie. A naive girl being possessed by multiple demons, her demonic countenance, her bloody contortion, deserves an award based on how well they were done. Her performance will scare you out, so be warned.
The performances, the screenplay, the directing, everything works on this movie's favour. While it could've done better with a shorter length, you won't regret using up your 120 minutes on this movie, because it's spectacular. 9/10
The exorcism of Emily rose is inspired by true events which makes it both shocking and disturbing. When you know that it is quite possible that this has happened to someone it disturbs you no end although you don't even know Emily rose.
This movie is about exorcism as is evident in the title itself. How Emily reacts to the exorcism is the crux of this story. the main two characters of this movie Emily ( Jennifer carpenter ) and Father moore ( Tom Wilkinson ) carry this movie on their shoulders all the way. The movie talks about a exorcism gone wrong in which a girl, Emily rose dies. the priest involved, Tom Wilkinson is given a good lawyer to defend himself, played quite aptly by Laura Linny. Most part of the movie is played out in courtroom and the scenes look quite genuine.
You will never imagine that Jennifer carpenter is not the actual emilly who went through the ordeal. she is perfect and it is a travesty if she has not got any awards for this. Tom Wilkinson is in his usual elements and doesn't over act although there is a lot of scope to over act some of his scenes. He is very assured even when he is saying something about GODs and Demons which you yourself would not ever believe. His belief in his own work makes this movie the movie it is.
See it with your eyes open and you will be pleasantly surprised by the end of it. Of course after the movie, sleeping in the night is no guarantee.
Loosely based on the true story of Anneliese Michel, one would have hoped that the film delves more into the psychological aspects: Michel was a bright, young student in Germany, who was brought up in a almost fanatical Christian background. Suffering from epilepsy and what would later be diagnosed as schizophrenia, Michel at one time became convinced that she was possessed by demons (among them the emperor Nero and - I'd almost would like to say naturally - Adolf Hitler). This conviction was only nurtured by the local clergy and Michels fanatical parents, ending in the girls death after a lengthy ordeal of exorcisms, self-abuse and starvation. In Germany the story caused a stir and most involved would surely have gone to prison, if they wouldn't have been protected by the cloth of 'holy men'. The recordings of the priests interviewing (if you want to call it that) the girl are in the public domain and still give the listener a chill, whether one believes in the supernatural or not.
But "The Exorcism of Emily Rose" chooses to go another direction. Though the aspects of mental illness are brought up, the producer opted for a slightly more supernatural angle (or at least subliminally). Sure, the movie has some rather spooky, even scary moments, especially during the short vision sequences of Emily Rose and the often disturbing play by Karen Carpenter. The actress does an utterly convincing and excellent job. The rest is pretty much a court-room drama, concentrating on a lawyer defending the priest that may (or may not) have been responsible for Emily's death. An interesting premise, especially in this time and age where religion once again is trying to con its way into everyday life, from schools to politics. For that, the often sinister atmosphere and Carpenters intense performance the film gets a well deserved 7/10 from me.
For those interested in the case of Anneliese Michel, I'd recommend the German movie "Requiem" Hans-Christian Schmid, which deals with the whole issue without any hint of supernatural mumbo-jumbo. It's a bit on the lengthy side and way more pedestrian than "The Exorcism of Emily Rose", but nevertheless a fine reconstruction of the last days of Anneliese.
Loosely based on the story of Anneliese Michel, The Exorcism of Emily Rose concerns a self- proclaimed agnostic who undertakes the case of defending a parish priest accused of negligent homicide by the state after he performed an exorcism on a young girl named Emily Rose, which resulted in her death. The progress of demonic possession & the exorcism is presented in flashbacks.
Directed by Scott Derrickson, the film marks an impressive debut for the director & shows his instant grip with the genre as he's able to pull off the elements of horror in a balanced manner. Screenplay does have some weight on it but the final act is simply absurd. Camera-work goes dynamic after a relaxed opening, editing is a letdown in the middle & sound is effectively used.
Yet the only best thing to come out from the movie, according to me, is Jennifer Carpenter's committed performance as Emily Rose for she sure can scream but it's her body contortions, thanks to her double joints, which look pretty unsettling. Rest of the supporting cast does a fair job in their given roles plus Campbell Scott makes a fine impression as the prosecution lawyer with his swift, piercing & logical statements.
On an overall scale, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a missed opportunity because there was so much for grabs here yet it embraces the conventional route to turn out as an above-average chiller. The best moments are the ones featuring Carpenter & even though she goes a little overboard in few scenes, she's also the only one who manages to tie it up together from start to finish.
Some of the "scary parts" of the movie had me laughing or poking fun at the scene.... it was just a bit too much for such an otherwise good film. If they would have left some of that out I could have rated this movie a lot higher! The roles are well played by all of the actors. Most are very convincing... particularly in the courtroom! The drama keep me in suspense.
For me this movie was well worth a one time watch. I do recommend this movie if you like religious-occult themed horror films.