The Exorcism of Emily Rose

RATING:

Starring: Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, Campbell Scott, Jennifer Carpenter, Shoreh Aghdashloo, Colm Feore, Mary Beth Hurt and Henry Czerny. Written by Scott Derrickson, Paul Harris Boardman. Directed by Scott Derrickson.

Rated PG-13 - for thematic material, including intense/frightening sequences and disturbing images

In the end, it’s all about faith.

When approaching the subject matter surrounding “The Exorcism of Emily Rose”, a filmmaker and a discerning moviegoer must ask themselves the same question. Can a courtroom-horror movie work as a viable entertainment? Director Scott Derrickson working again with writing partner Paul Harris Boardman (Final Cut 2) answer that question with an unequivocal “Well, yeah…sorta”.

Derrickson and Boardman’s story is inspired by actual events that occurred in Bavaria, Germany during the late 1970s. A Catholic priest is arrested after presiding over repeated attempts to exorcise demons from a young woman who eventually dies. The young woman, who had been diagnosed an epileptic, had been counseled by the priest to stop taking the medicine prescribed by her neurologist. The priest is charged with Negligent Homicide. In the film, the setting has been changed to a community somewhere in Canada and the time is now or thereabouts.

Laura Linney stars as Defense Attorney Erin Bruner who has been enlisted by the Archdiocese to defend Father Moore, ably played by Tom Wilkinson. (You can tell she is the star of the movie because she is the only one allowed to have fabulous hair and you can tell he is only the costar because he barely remembers to brush his.) Linney portrays Bruner as a hard-drinking hotshot lawyer with a discernable edge and a clear agenda. She is no longer the up-and coming star at her firm even though she has some high-profile acquittals under her belt. Any remorse she may have about what she does to make a living is tied up within her ambition to Make Partner and her frustration with the glass ceiling. Tom Wilkinson is her opposite in every way. He plays a devout man with a well of faith and certainty so deep that he may drown in it completely. He challenges her to draw upon her neglected spirituality and to examine what it is she truly believes. The undertaking of this self-examination is as frightening to Bruner as some of the strange things that begin happening to her as she stumbles through the case. As the eerie coincidences pile up, her professional instincts and abilities begin to abandon her and she begins flirting with high-functioning alcoholism coupled with a severe crisis of self. Losing her tenuous grasp on the case, she freely admits to Father Moore that she is bringing some demons of her own to the proceedings.

Campbell Scott represents the State in a pitch-perfect performance. He combines the right mix of gravitas, common sense, and steely-eyed determination without losing his humanity and sense of humor. The writers do themselves and the actor a great service here by not painting the DA as a win-at-all costs bully determined to send the poor, misguided schlump priest up the river without a paddle. He even offers the Defense a sweet deal before the case goes to court. The fact that the audience is not asked to empirically hate the opposing counsel (as far too many courtroom dramas do) is a surprising and welcome relief.

The creative team calls upon some fine talents to tell the highly improbable tale. In addition to the strong work of Linney, Scott and Wilkinson, it should be noted that Jennifer Carpenter is a bit of a revelation as Emily Rose. She offers a deft physical portrayal of a simple, sheltered co-ed farm girl who descends into a maddeningly horrifying possession. She should no longer have to be relegated to supporting work in “White Chicks”. The cinematographer, Tom Stern (late of “Million Dollar Baby”) offers stark differences within his palette. The landscape scenes of the farmhouse evoke early Andrew Wyeth utilizing muted tones of gray, blue and soft brown. The visuals plunge the audience into an atmosphere of ephemera. Things seem simple enough here, but they aren’t always clear. Contrasted with the stark reality and broad colors and strokes of the scenes outside the world of the farmhouse, Stern presents the two worlds that are literally at war with each other here. That which we know logically beyond a reasonable doubt because we can see it, touch it and explain it and that which we can’t see or prove but know is irrevocably true by the strength of our faith.

I found myself engrossed most of the time and basically enjoying the performances until one scenery-ingesting scene involving a medical doctor whom actually attends the exorcism. I think this particular actor was possessed himself by the spirit of Donald Pleasance in the “Halloween” movies. Eventually there are simply one too many slow, tension-building walks down deserted, creepily lit hallways. The exorcism itself is quite scary until an unintentionally humorous Cat Attack. There is a poorly written denouement between Linney and Feore that feels like it was tacked onto the rest of the movie with duct tape. The film was in serious danger of writing itself into a corner until the conclusion, which while not wholly satisfying becomes acceptable as it mirrors most of the actual events that inspired the film in the first place.

So does the film work? As a whole, I believe it does about 75% of the time. I can’t endorse it whole-heartedly or slam it completely. This film certainly has the ability to entertain as long as the audience can overlook some of it problems. That sort of acceptance in the face of flawed uncertainty is perhaps the definition of faith.