The Exorcism of Emily Rose English Movie

Feature Film | 2005
Critics:
Audience:
Dec 1, 2005 By Subhash K. Jha


While viewing this harrowing tale of the wretchedly calamitous possession of a young life, I was repeatedly reminded of the much darker and scary "Exorcist" that came three decades ago.


Times have changed. Linda Blair who played the possessed girl in "The Exorcist" spewed far more than just venom in the earlier film. Now when Jennifer Carpenter plays the demonised girl-woman Emily Rose, she has to keep in mind that audiences wouldn't like her getting too in-your-face anti-Christ.


It's not about religion. It's about aesthetics. And that's the problem with "The Exorcism Of Emily Rose". It's a tale stylishly told, but it lacks the luminous terror of its earlier counterparts.


Too vacant in its glamorised view of the horror genre, it tends to overreach its scanty intentions, making a hash of the poor traumatised girl's predicament by adding excessive atmospherics to the goings-on.


The bitter truth about the story of Emily Rose is that it never affects us. The narrative stands outside her traumatised life, barely offering us a chance to look into her plight with anything more than passing curiosity.


There's the ambitious but compassionate lawyer Erin Bruner (Laura Linney) defending the benign priest (Tom Wilkinson) and his Catholic faith against the cynical public prosecutor Ethan Thomas (Campbell Scott).


In all fairness, the court proceedings are even-toned, balanced and engaging. But the main issue - whether Emily died of demoniacal possession or mental negligence - has to be weighed against the film's cinematic flaws, of which there's no dearth.


We never see the characters in anything beyond the shadows that are diligently crafted. The silhouette posture suits the film's shallow mood. The characters are seen running down cavernous corridors, chasing shadows and screaming at visages. We barely get the chance to savour their terror.


Snowed under ambient artistry, this film cries for more compelling characterisations. We aren't really surprised that poor Emily dies untreated.


No one has the time to stop being characters in this self-conscious scare-fest long enough to connect with their colleagues, or to convey the anguish of being in a situation they don't really understand.


Frankly we are caught in a larger dilemma: why was this film made?



Subhash K. Jha

   

MOVIE REVIEWS