SPOILERS AHEAD
How many times can Hollywood meddle with a format that has not been successful since the original “The Exorcist”? Many Exorcist clones have surfaced, as well as several unsuccessful sequels/prequel. The reason that the film “The Exorcist” was so successful falls into many categories. First and foremost, being that the idea of a film focusing on demonic possession was new to film goers at that time. Second, the film “The Exorcist” already had a very successful template to follow, the best-selling novel The Exorcist written by William Peter Blatty. Third, during the release of the film “The Exorcist” in the early 1970’s, most of America was still active church-goers; hence the reality of God versus the Devil was still a very strong belief.
Up until today, I have been extremely disappointed in all the films in which the marketing campaigns have tried to tout films as “the scariest movie since ‘The Exorcist’”. They never are. What made the new film “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” such a pleasant surprise to me was the fact that for once, a movie about demonic possession placed the actual possession itself on the back burner.
“The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is a very haunting film with some genuine terrifying imagery. Granted, there is some horribly cliché moments in the film (e.g.: Clocks stopping, gratuitous cat scare), but those few scenes are forgiven in the light of a great main plot. If you want to see a movie about a girl who is possessed by a demon that makes her head spin in a complete circle and forces the girl to projectile vomit then by all means go rent “The Exorcist”, because “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is not your cup of tea.
“The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is more courtroom drama than it is horror film. Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of scares available to break up the visually flat scenes in the court room, but if you are looking for gore galore, you won’t find it in this movie, which is a refreshing break from all the campy horror films that have tried previously to capitalize on popularity of “The Exorcist”. Much like the film and book “The Exorcist”, “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is loosely based on a true story. “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is an Americanized view of the alleged possession/exorcism and the resulting death of a young college student in Germany named Anneliese Michel. The pastor or priest performing the exorcism was arrested and charged with second degree murder and gross negligence resulting in the young girl’s death. In the film “The Exorcism of Emily Rose”, the audience is taken through the journey of events prior to and immediately following the failed exorcism and subsequent death of the titular character.
“The Exorcism of Emily Rose” is an excellent attempt of breaking away from the tired formula of demonic possession films. The film is more humanistic in its approach. It allows the audience to feel sympathy for both the title character portrayed by Jennifer Carpenter (“White Chicks”) and the priest on trial nicely played by Tom Wilkinson (“Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind”). Rounding out the cast is the Laura Linney as the conflicted defense attorney who was hired by the arch dieses of the Catholic Church.
I was really expecting to be disappointed in this film. I was expecting another Exorcist knockoff. What a most pleasing surprise it was to walk away from the theater feeling quite the opposite. I am sure there are going to be the gore-hound movie fans who will walk away wanting to burn the movie theater down because of the misrepresentation of the film’s trailer/marketing.
***/***** (3 out of 5 asterisk)
I put the laughter in manslaughter