The Exorcism of Emily Rose
Screen Gems | Release Date: September 9, 2005
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 165 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
107
Mixed:
37
Negative:
21
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
0
TylerC.Feb 14, 2006
Laura Linney said in the commentry " movies are movies and they are entertaining and they should be entertaining." To me this is a way for her to say that it is ok to lie about a certain story as long as it is entertaining. There is no Emily Laura Linney said in the commentry " movies are movies and they are entertaining and they should be entertaining." To me this is a way for her to say that it is ok to lie about a certain story as long as it is entertaining. There is no Emily Rose. There is, however, a story about Anneliesel Michel, which this horrible movie was based on, and believe me, is a far cry away from the truth.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
MarkB.Sep 20, 2005
Since this dog-days box office smash does double duty as a demonic possession thriller AND would-be hot-button courtroom drama, it allows cowriter/director Scott Derrickson the admittedly unique if dubious distinction of having done TWO of Since this dog-days box office smash does double duty as a demonic possession thriller AND would-be hot-button courtroom drama, it allows cowriter/director Scott Derrickson the admittedly unique if dubious distinction of having done TWO of the worst directing jobs of 2005! His handling of the trial scenes, in which attorneys Laura Linney and Campbell Scott face off over whether or not catholic priest Tom Wilkinson was negligent in ordering the failed exorcism of (and denying medicine to) a sweet, earnest but devil-infested girl (Jennifer Carpenter) who was eventually killed by whoever or whatever took over her body, is as lazy and perfunctory as a garden-variety 1975 ABC-TV Movie of the Week at best...which still makes it preferable to his fraudulent and endless use of P. T. Barnum-like gimmicks in the allegedly scary flashback sequences. At least legendary schlockmeister/showman William Castle was ambitious enough in his day to jerry-rig entire movie theaters showing his stuff; whenever Derrickson wants to get an unearned rise out of his audience, he simply turns the sound up to 11, and running faucets, doorknobs and Fluffy the cat become objects of phony terror. (I mean, if the mere presence of loud, sudden noises is normally indicative that the minions of darkness are present, then shouldn't anyone living down the street from a bowling alley call Ghostbusters?) I've always found William Friedkin's film that started all this, The Exorcist, to be one of the most ridiculously overrated horror films of all time largely because it doesn't really immerse its audience in the situation beyond the blasphemous grossouts; whenever I've viewed it in theaters, many of the viewers only paid attention during the sensationalistic pea-soup-vomit/ use-a-crucifix-for-a-nonworshipful-purpose / kick-the-priest-in-a-place- that-ensures-he'll-never-be-a-father-should-he-change- his-mind-about-his-calling sequences; during the talky scenes, they often talk too. The Exorcism of Emily Rose has the exact opposite problem; the trial, as uninterestingly as it's filmed, at least brings up a few potentially provocative questions: how responsible is a man of God in a Christian country when his actions, sincerely believed to be God's will, go disastrously wrong? When do medicine and religion get to work hand and hand and when must they of necessity be at odds with one another? Can an agnostic believe in the possibility of good and evil supernatural forces and still be an agnostic? Does revealing the preence and methods of the Devil truly glorify God or put undue emphasis on His enemy? Sadly, every time Derrickson threatens to deal with one or more of these questions, he nervously reverts to the trite, third-rate boogedy-boogedy-boogedy once again. He also fails his wonderful actors, who are certainly capable of rich, multishaded characterizations, but you couldn't prove it here; smug, supercilious Scott, gruff-but-principled Wilkinson, and doubtful-but-compassionate Linney are all drawn with the thickest of crayons. Ultimately, it's Jennifer Carpenter in the title role who suffers the most, however; her endless possession scenes are technically skillful to be sure, but only once do we get a brief glimpse of what Emily was like before being taken over, and as a result Derrickson robs both Carpenter of the chance to prove that she's an actress of any more range than Linda Blair, and us of the opportunity to truly experience her tragedy since we don't get a real chance to know what she could've been. Actually Derrickson's approach reminded me not so much of The Exorcist as of another notorious 1970s box office hit, the el cheapo psuedodocumentary In Search of Noah's Ark, which packed movie houses (for a week, anyway) by promising to reveal where the ark was hidden, then completely copping out. The Exorcism of Emily Rose's $30 million opening weekend gross seems to indicate that Sony Pictures has the same ability to pack in the herds as Sunn Classic once did, but my question is, how did they also con so many distinguished Academy award nominees to also sign on for this exploitative drivel?… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
allylJan 4, 2006
Completely illogical and sappy. the dumbest defense of a client in all legal history.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
ChristyBJan 11, 2006
It had a few scenes that made me jump, which is important in a horror movie, but the movie wasn't any good. I was very disappointed.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
ZiftK.Mar 12, 2006
trash, avoid at all cost. The only reason this movie got a 1 was because it made me laugh a few times. The pathetic scenes of "acting" is just pathetic. Watch at your own risk.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
1
MrSandmanAug 19, 2010
This movie was terrible. In name of my Lord Jesus Christ, this movie should be banned. Everyone knows that demonic possession is an issue that causes a lot of pain and a lot of suffering to a lot of families in de United States only. I thinkThis movie was terrible. In name of my Lord Jesus Christ, this movie should be banned. Everyone knows that demonic possession is an issue that causes a lot of pain and a lot of suffering to a lot of families in de United States only. I think that the director of this movie should be stoned to death... I'm just sayin'-… Expand
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
2
PanchogulMay 7, 2020
Que esté supuestamente basada en hechos reales no la hace mejor película que las que sean enteramente de ficción, en lo personal me aburrió a más no poder, con más de la mitad de la película desarrollada en escenas de tribunales y loQue esté supuestamente basada en hechos reales no la hace mejor película que las que sean enteramente de ficción, en lo personal me aburrió a más no poder, con más de la mitad de la película desarrollada en escenas de tribunales y lo supuestamente perturbador no tiene nada del otro mundo.… Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
0
KMDec 13, 2005
This movie stinks on just about every way shape and form. slow stupid full of nonsense. dont waste your time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
KyleMDec 16, 2005
Bad just bad. nothing good about this movie. just plain old boring and dumb.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
2
GlitterAug 30, 2013
Perhaps best presented under the title, "Law & Order: Exorcism Victims Unit", would the film have attracted praise for being nothing more than what was to have been expected (utter boredom in a festering court melodrama of drivel.) Devoid ofPerhaps best presented under the title, "Law & Order: Exorcism Victims Unit", would the film have attracted praise for being nothing more than what was to have been expected (utter boredom in a festering court melodrama of drivel.) Devoid of interesting characters, and featuring the most lacking of cinematography, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is actually The Exorcism of Your Time.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
horcrux2007Sep 2, 2014
"The Exorcism of Emily Rose" is half courtroom drama and half exorcism film, and it fails on both levels. It is neither an intriguing courtroom drama or a scary possession film. It's poorly acted and shot and extremely boring. I don't"The Exorcism of Emily Rose" is half courtroom drama and half exorcism film, and it fails on both levels. It is neither an intriguing courtroom drama or a scary possession film. It's poorly acted and shot and extremely boring. I don't recommend it at all.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
More From This Movie

46 Critic Reviews

6.6 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 72 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL