Die Anwältin Erin Bruner übernimmt die Verteidigung eines Priesters, der bei einer jungen Frau einen tödlichen Exorzismus durchgeführt hat. Im Laufe des von der Kirche kritisch beäugten Verf... Alles lesenDie Anwältin Erin Bruner übernimmt die Verteidigung eines Priesters, der bei einer jungen Frau einen tödlichen Exorzismus durchgeführt hat. Im Laufe des von der Kirche kritisch beäugten Verfahrens muss sie ihren eigenen Glauben in Frage stellen und mit mysteriösen Erscheinungen f... Alles lesenDie Anwältin Erin Bruner übernimmt die Verteidigung eines Priesters, der bei einer jungen Frau einen tödlichen Exorzismus durchgeführt hat. Im Laufe des von der Kirche kritisch beäugten Verfahrens muss sie ihren eigenen Glauben in Frage stellen und mit mysteriösen Erscheinungen fertig werden.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 4 Gewinne & 9 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Consider the fact that Linney's character's true conflict is not winning the trial, but a satisfyingly complex internal struggle which I will not name so as not to spoil the movie. Or the plethora of food for thought that the movie offers, regarding existentialist issues of perception vs. objective truth, and social issues of liability and responsibility.
Some very interesting scenes that find ways to express things in subtle and creative ways without spelling them out. And an incredible and ballsy performance by Jennifer Carpenter, which takes Linda Blair's possession to a whole new level. Also, notice how a key dramatic monologue is presented, contrary to what we might expect, with no sentimental music in the background. The cinematography is also great. I was reminded of Dario Argento's vivid colors in Suspiria on more than one occasion.
Although it's not the focus of the film, the movie also offers a few very cool scare moments, and seeing Emily possessed is terrifying.
This is my favorite "underdog" movie of the year so far.
I'm a big believer in the supernatural and I've studied it a lot in the past. What is presented here is a very believable, very frightening account of demonic possession. I honestly believe that this really happened. Although the film is lengthy and slow-moving, it's never boring and that's because somebody had the great idea of including harrowing flashbacks of the possessed Emily during the courtroom case. It really works, breaking up the courtroom tension, and adding in genuine frights and chills along the way too.
The movie is topped off with a fantastic cast working at the top of their game. I don't believe Laura Linney has ever been better than she has here, and her portrayal of a woman with integrity is fine. Tom Wilkinson makes us believe he is the disturbed priest with every drop of sweat that comes from him. As for Jennifer Carpenter, well she should be going places with her portrayal of the tormented Emily here, and I hope she doesn't suffer the same kind of career nosedive as Linda Blair did in the '80s.
The acting was excellent, from one end to the other. The scenes, the flashbacks, the drama, the horror, the faith vs doubt theme ... all were entwined in a back-and-forth web that maintained constant focus on the strongest feature of all: the Story itself.
And what a Story! I won't give it away except to say that the plots and subplots and intrigue and characterizations were all woven together to spin a simply riveting, terrifying, provocative, endearing, challenging Story.
I really liked the multiple depictions of What Happens and How the Characters React. You see Something Happen; and then feel Fear; and then watch the Face of the Character on hand experience Fear; and then perhaps the order is slightly changed: you see the Face of the Character experience Fear as the Character gazes in terror over the viewer's shoulder. Then you see What the Character is looking at. And experience Fear.
I also really liked the legal conflict ... and the way the Story honored both sides. There's no doubt, ever, where our sympathies lie: with the Laura Linney character. Yet, the prosecutor is not at all a "straw man." He is give a great opening, and is effective and believable throughout. This enhanced greatly the Doubt vs Faith conflict that reinforced the Story throughout.
And through all this, the Priest's insistence that the Story should be told, is what really drove the action above all. This gave a feeling of authenticity to the Story that both made it appealing, and frightening.
A wonderful, wonderful, movie ... !
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is based upon a true story, the events that lead up to the death of Emily Rose. The real person who inspired this movie was Anneliese Michel. Emily Rose was a young college student, who believed she was possessed. Her family and her pastor did everything they could to save her. The story wasn't overly predictable. It was a look back on what exactly happened when Emily Rose got possessed and how it ended. the Priest, Father Moore was help by an agnostic lawyer, Erin Bruner and her trying to not only get ahead in her career but convince a journey that medical science could not determine. Emily Rose had a medical condition but a demonic possession. But the prosecutor, Ethan Thomas was a devout catholic and against the priest, Father Moore. The dynamics between the key characters is interesting and well thought out.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesJennifer Carpenter's audition was so convincing and scary that the director decided to cast her right then.
- PatzerThe prosecutor is only partially correct in that humans have two sets of vocal cords (they are properly known as vocal "folds"). He calls them "duel sets," consisting of the "superior vocal cords" and the "primary ones." They are correctly known colloquially as "true vocal folds" and "false vocal folds." The FVF are called "false" because they are made up of membrane, whereas the true folds have a deep layer of muscle tissue and can be controlled. The FVF can be recruited by powerful airflow and/or by disciplined muscular movements by the muscles surrounding them. However, they cannot be "activated" in the sense that a muscle can, and would not produce a different "voice." At most, some harmonic overtones or vibratory interference (such as that heard in Tibetan chanting) might be heard. The prosecutor uses the term "dual voices" as if it means two separate actual voices, as if "voice" was being produced by two distinct sets of vocal folds, which is not possible in humans. The writers confused it with some individuals' ability to produce two different fundamental frequencies by vibrating each of the true vocal folds at different rates, but the act of forming words is not determined at the vocal fold level, but by resonances created by the positions of the articulators in the vocal tract.
- Zitate
Father Moore: Tell me your six names!
Emily Rose: [possessed] We are the ones who dwell within.
Emily Rose: [in Hebrew] I am the one who dwelt within CAIN!
Emily Rose: [in Latin] I am the one who dwelt within NERO!
Emily Rose: [in Greek] I once dwelt within JUDAS!
Emily Rose: [in German] I was with Legion!
Emily Rose: [in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic] I am Belial!
Emily Rose: [in English] And I am Lucifer, the devil in the flesh.
- Crazy CreditsOpening statement: This film is based on a true story.
- Alternative VersionenTheatrical version 119 min. and the unrated version 122 min.
- VerbindungenFeatured in 2006 MTV Movie Awards (2006)
- SoundtracksPrelude, Op. 3, No. 2 in C Sharp Minor
Music by Sergei Rachmaninoff (attributed as Written by)
Top-Auswahl
Everything New on Hulu in August
Everything New on Hulu in August
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Offizieller Standort
- Sprachen
- Auch bekannt als
- El exorcismo de Emily Rose
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 19.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 75.072.454 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 30.054.300 $
- 11. Sept. 2005
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 145.166.804 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 59 Min.(119 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1