The Exorcism of Emily Rose

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. (22/07/2008)

My skepticism towards the easily outdated topic disappeared when Laura Linney first appeared and the seemingly unbelievable intention to connect a courtroom drama with a horror started to fit into the presented concept naturally and simply. When the courtroom storyline becomes too straightforward, we are given a convincing insert by the twisting Jennifer Carpenter, and when similar scenes exceed the tolerable limit, we return to another hearing. Moreover, the formula "based on true events" works reliably this time as well, and during this brisk, but above all, unpredictable film, theological and philosophical dilemmas were running through my mind non-stop. So mainly for that, I must give Exorcism a big salute, not to mention the long-awaited climax in court. (04/04/2006)

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)

Surprisingly very decent. If it weren't for the corny phrases during the "horror" passages, I would even dare to use the word authentic. It helps a lot that the point of the film is not about scares, but rather about the reconstruction of the trial with Father Moore and a rather interesting dilemma about whether to believe the facts or admit the supernatural. The atmosphere is dense, and it’s really a pity that the film tries to evoke the impression of the devil's existence in a nickel-and-dime way, without any invention. (01/04/2008)

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% (19/01/2008)