Thing is, it’s not a straight-up horror movie. Aside from those two points mentioned before that give the film much buzz, it’s also something of a genre jumper, as it mixes up horror with a courtroom drama. The possession and exorcism are given to us as flashbacks of courtroom testimony. The film’s narrative frame is the trial of Fr. Moore (Tom Wilkinson), who watched over Emily through her possession.
Whenever the word exorcism appears, memories of the chilling experience of watching The Exorcist come to mind, and it is this film that any other films dealing with the topic will be measured against. By going with a courtroom drama that in essence questions whether the title character was indeed possessed or merely suffering from a psychological condition, the movie neatly sidesteps the need to spook out the audience.
There are no clear supernatural/demonic powers that Emily Rose attains from being possessed. There’ll be no head spinning and continuous vomiting from this possession. Rather the symptoms are things that although out of the ordinary, would have logical explanations. Don’t think, though, that this means the movie isn’t scary.
Watching Jennifer Carpenter play Emily Rose as she suffers, seeing those hideous contortions, and looking into those eyes will give one shivers. If we’re to compare this with The Exorcist, then one can safely say that Carpenter gives Linda Blair a run for her money as scariest possessed person. There are hardly any special effects, which makes the portrayal of the possession even more chilling.
We’re shown what happened to Emily as the trial progresses. On one side is the prosecution, with Campbell Scott playing lead counsel, presenting a medical explanation for what Emily was going through and putting the guilt of her death on Fr. Moore’s hands. On the other side is Laura Linney’s Erin Bruner, who takes the case just as she does any other, but unexpectedly finds herself in a situation where she begins to believe.
Linney’s an outstanding actress, and her no-nonsense demeanor gives the film a certain weight not normally had in horror movies. She’s well grounded, and even when the dark forces that Fr. Moore has warned her about seemingly come around, she’s able to keep her cool. It’s this balance that’s always tested in the movie, whether one’s beliefs are rock solid, or if they can be challenged or questioned, if there is room for these to change.
As both cases are presented, one comes to find that the trial could go either way. And one strength of it all is that it never really tells you which side was right. There is no judgment, nothing to tell you whether Emily was possessed or not. Unlike most courtroom dramas where we’re told which side to root for, here we’re put in the juror’s seat. In that seat we’re asked to question what we believe, what we can allow ourselves to believe. This kind of ambiguity takes the fear to another level.
On the visceral level there are creep outs and chills and genuinely scary scenes. Director Scott Derrickson not only knows how to set up a scary shot, but also how to play with atmosphere and sound to up the terror level. But what The Exorcism of Emily Rose manages to hit even better is the level of residual fear, where one walks out of the theater with scary memories and scary ideas that he’ll have to live with from now on.
