The Exocism of Emily Rose (possible spoilers)
Jstas
Posts: 14,842
OK, saw this on Friday. It was a decent movie. Oscar worthy? Only the leading actress, Laura Linney. But hell, I'd give her an Oscar based on looks alone! She is one of those classic beauties of the silver screen and not just because she's hot but she has talent and lots of it! But I digress.
From IMDB:
A bitter and repressed single lawyer (Laura Linney) takes on the church and the state when she fights for the life of a priest who performed a deadly exorcism on a young woman. Linney must battle the cocky state lawyer as well as her own lonliness, as she realizes that her career so far has not fulfilled her, nor is she happy in her job on a day to day basis.
Now that summary is all well and good but this film's focus is about the exorcism of the character Emily Rose. While yes,, the lead chaarcter's development is cruicial to the primary plotline in most movies, this is one where it isn't. The director focused on the primary character's character development and main plot as a secondary aspect of the movie. This can be good, this can be bad. For this movie, it seemed like a good thing because it worked well.
Now, since that is out of the way, here's the deal. The story itself was thin as is most court room dramas. That's why I think the director chose to focus on the story of the title character, Emily Rose. The story is really about the priest who tried to do the failed exocism and the lawyer that is defending him. The whole court room drama is well acted aside from the prosecutor being a little over the top. The real interesting aspect of the film was the story of Emily Rose and how she became possesed.
Now they delve into the lead character's interaction in the case making her susceptible to attack by demons and how certain witnesses are affected. They also hit on little bitty parts of the plot that seem to have little significance to the story of Emily Rose but rather to an epiphany of the main character. They seem completely unrelated, this epiphany and teh main story of Emily Rose.
It kind of sad actually because the film had alot of potential. The scenes of Emily Rose actually being possesed could have been lifter right out of The Exorcist. Then again, if the film was supposed to be a "true story" or "based on a true story", they would have to have some consistency. However, this suffers greatly from an identity crisis. Is the film a courtroom drama or it is a thriller/horror? This is it's main vice. It keeps flipping back and forth between the two. Basically, a story is explained in the courtroom, the story teller gets a few sentences in to the story and then it flips to the live action version of the story. This flips back and forth and probably half of the movie is spent watching the main character Laura Linney deal with the research of the case and the "attacks" by Satan's minions.
One thing that the movie has that was not needed was teh cheap scares. One or two of the cheap scares were well done and had not only a visible/audible impact but relevance to the scene and gave an impression of quickness and suddeness to the scene. However, the were far too many musical crescendos that ended with a loud blast and something flashing the screen. I spent a good portion of the film wincing while waiting for the extraneous cheap scares to happen. Real horror isn't loud. It's manufacturered in the mind of man and doesn't need to be flashy, fast-moving and loud. Wanna see what I'm talking about? Watch the movie Saw.
Overall, I found the movie entertaining enough. However, the movie theater lent nothing to the film and it is entirely watchable os a 20 inch Zenith on an RCA DVD player at home. You don't need fancy, whiz-bang theaters to watch this movie, they add nothing. The plotline is weak but has substance. The characters are well developed and most of the acting is quite credible. Is it the movie of the year? Not by a long shot. Is it worth a watch? Sure, you bet. Is it scary? In my opinion, no. In fact, I laughed through most of it. Hell, I laughed at The Exorcist while the rest of the theater was sobbing or offended by the visuals on the screen. That's me though. Horror movies have never frightened me. Cheap scares and hollow plot lines are too easy to see through. Real life is scary enough to waste time on a horror movie.
So, in summation, it's worth a rental but don't bother with it in the theaters. I wouldn't stumble over myself to own it either but if it showed up on the discount DVD rack, I'd be inclined to grab it.
From IMDB:
A bitter and repressed single lawyer (Laura Linney) takes on the church and the state when she fights for the life of a priest who performed a deadly exorcism on a young woman. Linney must battle the cocky state lawyer as well as her own lonliness, as she realizes that her career so far has not fulfilled her, nor is she happy in her job on a day to day basis.
Now that summary is all well and good but this film's focus is about the exorcism of the character Emily Rose. While yes,, the lead chaarcter's development is cruicial to the primary plotline in most movies, this is one where it isn't. The director focused on the primary character's character development and main plot as a secondary aspect of the movie. This can be good, this can be bad. For this movie, it seemed like a good thing because it worked well.
Now, since that is out of the way, here's the deal. The story itself was thin as is most court room dramas. That's why I think the director chose to focus on the story of the title character, Emily Rose. The story is really about the priest who tried to do the failed exocism and the lawyer that is defending him. The whole court room drama is well acted aside from the prosecutor being a little over the top. The real interesting aspect of the film was the story of Emily Rose and how she became possesed.
Now they delve into the lead character's interaction in the case making her susceptible to attack by demons and how certain witnesses are affected. They also hit on little bitty parts of the plot that seem to have little significance to the story of Emily Rose but rather to an epiphany of the main character. They seem completely unrelated, this epiphany and teh main story of Emily Rose.
It kind of sad actually because the film had alot of potential. The scenes of Emily Rose actually being possesed could have been lifter right out of The Exorcist. Then again, if the film was supposed to be a "true story" or "based on a true story", they would have to have some consistency. However, this suffers greatly from an identity crisis. Is the film a courtroom drama or it is a thriller/horror? This is it's main vice. It keeps flipping back and forth between the two. Basically, a story is explained in the courtroom, the story teller gets a few sentences in to the story and then it flips to the live action version of the story. This flips back and forth and probably half of the movie is spent watching the main character Laura Linney deal with the research of the case and the "attacks" by Satan's minions.
One thing that the movie has that was not needed was teh cheap scares. One or two of the cheap scares were well done and had not only a visible/audible impact but relevance to the scene and gave an impression of quickness and suddeness to the scene. However, the were far too many musical crescendos that ended with a loud blast and something flashing the screen. I spent a good portion of the film wincing while waiting for the extraneous cheap scares to happen. Real horror isn't loud. It's manufacturered in the mind of man and doesn't need to be flashy, fast-moving and loud. Wanna see what I'm talking about? Watch the movie Saw.
Overall, I found the movie entertaining enough. However, the movie theater lent nothing to the film and it is entirely watchable os a 20 inch Zenith on an RCA DVD player at home. You don't need fancy, whiz-bang theaters to watch this movie, they add nothing. The plotline is weak but has substance. The characters are well developed and most of the acting is quite credible. Is it the movie of the year? Not by a long shot. Is it worth a watch? Sure, you bet. Is it scary? In my opinion, no. In fact, I laughed through most of it. Hell, I laughed at The Exorcist while the rest of the theater was sobbing or offended by the visuals on the screen. That's me though. Horror movies have never frightened me. Cheap scares and hollow plot lines are too easy to see through. Real life is scary enough to waste time on a horror movie.
So, in summation, it's worth a rental but don't bother with it in the theaters. I wouldn't stumble over myself to own it either but if it showed up on the discount DVD rack, I'd be inclined to grab it.
Expert Moron Extraordinaire
You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
You're just jealous 'cause the voices don't talk to you!
Post edited by Jstas on
Comments
-
I thought it was pretty good. I liked how they left it up to you as to whether she was really possessed or just epeleptic (spelling?)
I didnt consider it a horror movie so I didnt mind the "scare" scenes. Most were creepy enough to give them credit.
The chick that played Rose was awesome. The scene in the barn was damn good and it gimme the jibblies!polkaudio sound quality competitor since 2005
MECA SQ Rookie of the Year 06 ~ MECA State Champ 06,07,08,11 ~ MECA World Finals 2nd place 06,07,08,09
08 Car Audio Nationals 1st ~ 07 N Georgia Nationals 1st ~ 06 Carl Casper Nationals 1st ~ USACi 05 Southeast AutumnFest 1st
polkaudio SR6500 --- polkaudio MM1040 x2 -- Pioneer P99 -- Rockford Fosgate P1000X5D -
The girls I was with were pretty scared of this movie but I was waiting when the actual movie starts. In other words it was very boring to me. I guess I was expecting more horror in it but then I realized it's based on a true story.
