What do you get when you combine demon possession with courtroom drama, with a dash of "based on a true story"? You get something like The Exorcism of Emily Rose. What do you get when you take the above description and market it as a straight up horror/suspense filled possession film? You get a movie that will do good opening weekend box, but when it doesn't pay off on the expectations, word of mouth will trickle out and the take will probably drop off sharply.
Part of the above is pure speculation, so don't hold me to it. I have to say that after seeing the movie, I realize just how poorly this was marketed. The commercials were solely geared towards the opening weekend box office with no mind towards anything down the line. The commercials are a poor representation of what the film really is. OK, enough about that, do you want to know what I thought of the movie? I liked it, a lot more than I ever expected to, not perfect, but very good.
The film is based on the true story of an exorcism that took place in Germany. The key words are "based on", whenever seeing them you would do good to remember that what you are about to see has been passed through the hands of many creative staff. Writers, directors, producers, any number of people put their fingerprints on it. What you end up seeing may be based on a real occurrence, it is generally far from the real thing.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is told flashback style, using the courtroom drama surrounding Father Moore as the framing device to tell the story of Emily Rose. It is an effective way to present the tale, simultaneously giving us an interesting angle on the characters and not just rehashing The Exorcist, which is what I was afraid it was going to become.
The tale follows the trial of Father Moore, who has been charged with the negligent homicide of young Emily Rose. Moore contends that she died as a result of demonic possession after a failed exorcism, the prosecution says that she was a victim of a combination of epilepsy and psychosis. This is the launching point where both sides present compelling evidence to support their side of the story.
The trial framing is a great source of tension creation, it also slows down the pace. The pacing allows the actors actually create characters, rather than mere plot devices. Laura Linney stars as Erin Bruner, the lawyer who is defending Father Moore. She is a conflicted person, she doesn't necessarily believe in exorcisms or demons, or even God, but through the given testimony and what she uncovers she learns to be open to the possibilities. Linney gives her a strength that is infectious. Her defendant is played by Tom Wilkinson, who gives our embattled priest the courage to stand up for what he believes to be the truth. On the otherside of the courtroom is Ethan Thomas, played by Campbell Scott. He is a character that has set aside his beliefs to espouse the necessity of medical treatment in this case, someone whose goal is to defuse the religious aspects of the case and discredit them.
I would be remiss if I did not mention Jennifer Carpenter who does a wonderful job portraying our title character Emily Rose. She centers this film, giving us a victim to focus on, someone who is alternatingly sympathetic and frightening. A girl frightened by what is going on, a girl who has an inner strength to fight, a girl that the audience must connect with in order to be drawn into the courtroom drama. Jennifer Carpenter does a wonderful job of taking hold of you as you watch. Without her, the movie would not work.
The film works on a level which separates itself from being an actual horror film. To be sure, it does have it's share of horrific suspense, moments that may shock you, or make you jump. By and far, it creates a creepy atmosphere that carries over to the courtroom, where the real story is being told.
Director Scott Derrickson displays a steady hand, one that is willing to sit back and let the characters tell the story. There are some interesting flourishes and eerie looking scenes as well, but they are never overpowering, nothing comes across as being gratuitous. He also co-wrote the script with Paul Harris Boardman. The film is told primarily from the point of view of the Erin Bruner character, while the prosecution gets the short end of the stick. Despite that, I didn't really get the feeling that they were trying to take sides. I would have liked that to have been firmly handled, but the whole "you decide" vibe still seems to work for it.
Bottomline. This is a surprisingly strong film, with some good performances, moments of eerie unease, and a good source of courtroom drama. I have no qualms recommending it, so long as you realize that the advertising does not accurately reflect the tone of the film.
Recommended.
0 comments:
Post a Comment