The Exorcism of Emily Rose

September 9th, 2005


more trailers The Exorcism of Emily Rose

The Exorcism of Emily RoseThe Exorcism of Emily RoseLaura Linney and Jennifer Carpenter at event of The Exorcism of Emily RoseThe Exorcism of Emily RoseThe Exorcism of Emily RoseThe Exorcism of Emily Rose

A lawyer takes on a negligent homicide case involving a priest who performed an exorcism on a young girl.

Release Year: 2005

Rating: 6.7/10 (46,131 voted)

Critic's Score: 46/100

Director: Scott Derrickson

Stars: Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, Shohreh Aghdashloo

When a younger girl called Emily Rose dies, everyone puts blame on the exorcism which was performed on her by Father Moore prior to her death. The priest is arrested on suspicion of murder. The trail begins with lawyer Erin Bruner representing Moore, but it is not going to be easy, as no one wants to believe what Father Moore says is true.

Writers: Paul Harris Boardman, Scott Derrickson

Laura Linney - Erin Bruner
Tom Wilkinson - Father Moore
Campbell Scott - Ethan Thomas
Jennifer Carpenter - Emily Rose
Colm Feore - Karl Gunderson
Joshua Close - Jason
Kenneth Welsh - Dr. Mueller
Duncan Fraser - Dr. Cartwright
JR Bourne - Ray
Mary Beth Hurt - Judge Brewster
Henry Czerny - Dr. Briggs
Shohreh Aghdashloo - Dr. Adani
Steve Archer - Guy in Bar
Arlene Belcastro - Praying Woman #2
David Berner - Karl's Crony #1

Taglines: What happened to Emily?


Official Website: Gaumont Columbia Tristar [France] | Sony Pictures |

Release Date: 9 September 2005

Filming Locations: D Block, Buchanan Building, University of British Columbia, Robson Square Campus - 800 Robson Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Box Office Details

Budget: $20,000,000(estimated)

Opening Weekend: $30,054,300 (USA) (11 September 2005) (2981 Screens)

Gross: $140,238,064 (Worldwide)

Technical Specs

Runtime:  | USA: (unrated version)

Did You Know?

Based on the true story of Anneliese Michel, a young German woman who suffered a similar fate to the fictional Emily Rose in the 1970s, and "The Exorcism of Anneliese Michel", an account of the subsequent court case by expert witness Felicitas D. Goodman, an anthropologist called in as an expert on possession. Michel's parents and the two priests who performed her exorcism were prosecuted, though the prosecution asked that the parents be excused from punishment as they had "suffered enough". Ultimately, the accused were found guilty of manslaughter resulting from negligence, and the two clergymen were sentenced to six months in jail (which was later suspended) and three years of probation. The most significant differences are that Michel periodically fasted for several months as part of her exorcism and remained on medication until her death, while the fictional Rose was incapable of eating due to demonic forces and decided herself to stop taking her medication with the consent of her care-providers. The story was heavily adapted for cinematic purposes.

Factual errors: The prosecutor is correct in that humans have two sets of vocal cords; however he is incorrect that she could speak in two voices at once. This is because your mouth and tongue are also involved in speaking, so Emily's words would come out in two tones at once, not two completely separate speaking voices.

Dr. Cartwright: That girl was not scizophrenic, she was not epileptic, or any combination of the two. I've seen hundreds of people with those problems. They have terrible afflictions, of course, but they don't scare me.
Erin Bruner: But what you saw in Emily that night? It scared you?
Dr. Cartwright: God, if i'd known, i never would have been there. I examined that girl before i drove back to the city. She was lucid and completely aware of the seperate entity inside her. When she wasn't in it's grasp, she was totally herself and completely normal, which conradicts the medical statement...

User Review

Excellent on so many levels; a lesson in mainstream film-making

Rating: 8/10

Wonderful, wonderful movie. A lesson in film-making. I know a lot of people won't be able to see it for what it is because of the supernatural/horror elements (which are usually a turn-off for film snobs), but the movie is just extremely well-made.

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.