Egzorcyzmy Emily Rose

A fine courtroom drama with an interesting and attractive premise, from which I will only remember the absolutely brilliant ten-minute or so scene of the actual exorcism of Emily Rose. It doesn't let you breathe and becomes a clear highlight of scenes of this kind, including The Exorcist. (02.12.2005)

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)

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)

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)

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)