The Exorcism of Emily Rose

My skepticism towards the easily outdated topic disappeared when Laura Linney first appeared and the seemingly unbelievable intention to connect a courtroom drama with a horror movie started to fit into the presented concept naturally and simply. When the courtroom storyline becomes too straightforward, we are given a compelling insert of the twisting Jennifer Carpenter; when similar scenes exceed the limits of tolerability, 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, not to mention the long-awaited climax in court, I must give The Exorcism of Emily Rose a big salute. (04/04/2006)

A notch better than The Exorcist, which doesn’t have even a drop of rational explanation and the viewer must believe in the supernatural, whether they like it or not. The Exorcism of Emily Rose is much more variable and tries to look at things from different perspectives. The judicial aspect cleverly helps with this in the present, allowing us to listen to alternative opinions of people not directly involved with the accused. The theme is very interesting overall and very well executed. The exorcism scenes are incredibly explosive and captivating (far surpassing The Exorcist), effectively pinning the viewer to their seat. Equally impressive are Christopher Young's musical motifs, which create a perfect nerve-wracking atmosphere. And last but not least, we have Laura Linney's performance. A serious film about a serious topic, but one that looks at it with a cool head, and that is appreciated. (25/06/2006)

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. (26/10/2005)

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)

I love courtroom dramas and I love horror movies. And to mix a courtroom drama with exorcism horror along with the signature of one of the best horror directors, Scott Derrickson? Score one! Laura Linney is brilliant and believable as the defense attorney, and the whole story is simple but so suspenseful and engagingly delivered that you are glued to your seat from beginning to end just waiting for the final verdict. It's an atmospherically captivating film that takes place in a courtroom rather than the horror section that the film is more or less just spiced up with, but as a whole it works well and I don't have much to fault it for. (11/07/2022)