THE EXORCISM OF EMILY ROSE MOVIE REVIEW

For a movie about demonic possession, The Exorcism of Emily Rose spends a surprising amount of time in a courtroom — and that’s what makes this tale a little more fascinating than your typical spooky season demon flick. Director Scott Derrickson (years before digging into The Black Bag) blends supernatural horror with legal drama, forcing faith, science, and law to wrestle for dominance.

The result isn’t as scary as The Exorcist nor as airtight and fun as A Few Good Men, but it’s a rare horror film that’s just as interested in cross-examination as it is in crucifixes.

Based “loosely” on the true story of Anneliese Michel, the film follows the trial of Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson), a Catholic priest charged with negligent homicide after performing an exorcism on college student Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter). The prosecution claims she died from medical neglect and injuries sustained from psychotic epileptic seizures; the defense insists she was possessed.

Derrickson spins a story where the scariest moments are often scarier when the legalities of our society spin their own web of ignorance. The courtroom sequences all feel surprisingly accurate in their structure and rhythm. From witness cross examinations to opening statements to the shock of expert witnesses — it’s all there, presented with a procedural authenticity that grounds the film’s more extreme elements.

The movie respects the rules of evidence even as it toys with the idea of evil being admissible in court. It’s rare to see a supernatural film that understands how law actually works, and that realism makes the film’s moral questions hit harder. Can belief itself be used as a defense? What happens when faith collides with the burden of proof? Derrickson doesn’t offer answers, but he relishes the tension. But it’s fascinating the way the legal system is used as a metaphor for society’s refusal to see beyond the veil.

Laura Linney, brilliant as usual, plays the pragmatic and agnostic defense attorney who finds her convictions shaken by the case. Her transformation isn’t dramatic — it’s incremental, as her own doubts start to challenge her own belief system. On the other side, prosecutor (Campbell Scott) argues with icy precision, embodying the legal system’s insistence on logic over faith. Both lawyers end up changed, not by the verdict itself, but by the haunting ambiguity of what they witnessed.

Carpenter, in what at the time was her breakout role, delivers a performance that’s all in the body. Her contortions, seizures, and wide-eyed fear feel so visceral they threaten to burst through the movie’s procedural shell. She sells the terror completely — whether you believe in possession or not, her performance will force you to question that position. Wilkinson matches her intensity with stoic conviction, as a priest who’d rather lose his freedom than his faith.

The flashbacks to Emily’s possession are chilling even if uneven, sometimes intentionally undermining the courtroom tension instead of deepening it. And while Derrickson’s direction is steady, the tone sometimes wobbles as it tries to strike a balance between horror and prestige drama, never fully committing to either. But that is the movie’s benefit. The scenes involving Emily transforming under the possession are as intense and frightening as the court room scenes are frustrating.

By the end, the verdict itself almost doesn’t matter. The trial becomes less about guilt and more about interpretation, whether evil is a matter of faith, medicine, or something in between.

Verdict: The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a rare hybrid of horror and legal drama, where cross-examination is as chilling as any exorcism. The courtroom accuracy gives weight to the terror, and the performances elevate it beyond genre. It’s a wild and chaotic demon possession flick, trickily balanced with a courtroom procedural.

You may not believe in demons before the film, but you may find yourself questioning your own judgment by the end.

More Movie Reviews:

www.scene-stealers.com