Movie Review: The Exorcism of Emily Rose
Last Sunday I watched a new release titled ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’. Unlike other movies about demonic possession, most notably ‘The Exorcist’, this particular feature does not subscribe to the school of swivelling heads and projectile vomiting. It also avoids the shocking, albeit amusing, sexual depravity portrayed by Linda Blair. Additionally, the demons in question here do not speak in an English accent, are short on swear words, and prefer ancient tongues to English.
The real events behind Emily Rose’s story are more shocking that the movie allows, but this is understandable given the director’s background. Director and co-writer Scott Derrickson is apparently a devout evangelical Christian – a churchgoer in other words. Although he may not subscribe to the Catholic tenets about possession and exorcism, the fact remains that he is a ‘believer’. As such, the movie goes ‘soft’ on the priest who sought to ‘exorcise’ Emily and further recommended that she cease taking her medication. Put simply, the viewer is left to interpret Emily as being either ‘mad’ or ‘possessed’. Given the numerous supernatural interludes, one would assume that the director is gunning for the latter assumption.
In the movie, Father Moore (played by Tom Wilkinson) is on trial for criminal negligence. He is represented by an ambitious female lawyer, Erin Brunner (played by Laura Linney), who describes herself as being agnostic, but gradually has her views swayed after waking repeatedly at 3am, described by Father Moore as the ‘witching hour’. She is further advised by Father Moore to take care, as "There are forces around this trial, dark and powerful forces."
Ooohhh …. Ooga booga.
OK, by now it must be apparent that I am something of a skeptic. Of course, I cannot explain with precision every ‘weird’ event which takes place in the world. However, I’ll be damned (no pun intended) if I seek to explain the inexplicable by reference to the unprovable (i.e. religious ideology, or rather ‘dogma’). For countless years, people have been using the mechanism of ‘fear’ as a means to coerce others to adopt their ideology. Accept Christ, or burn in hell for eternity – pray five times a day, or risk the wrath of Allah – don’t take a bite out of God’s apple, otherwise He’ll throw you out of Paradise …. It’s hard to see how Derrickson’s movie does anything different.
Fear of the irrational is something I have yet to come to grasps with. For example, after having watched the ‘Exorcism of Emily Rose’ I felt uneasy about crawling out of bed at 2:15am in order to take a much needed piss. Had I done so, my mind would have been replete with images of all manner of ‘dark beasts’ lurking in the shadows whilst my trembling hands struggled to find a light switch. This whole episode made me feel stupid and ashamed, especially after I relieved myself in an empty Sprite bottle and then proceeded to fall asleep once more (joke).
The fact remains that real life offers a great deal more to fear than fiction. For example, I often ask myself what I would fear more:
(i) one metre cockroach or Leader of the Opposition in a g-string;
(ii) demonic presence under my bed or threesome with Condoleeza Rice and Janet Reno;
(iii) a zombie or Phillip Ruddock (are the two even distinguishable?);
(iv) Lucifer in the flesh or being seriously ill with no medical insurance in the US;
(v) alien beings or being caught in a lift with several chronically flatulent vegetarians;
(vi) vampires or an international shortage of single malt scotch.
On second thought, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is about as scary as John Howard in a tutu compared to the more salient fears visible in our world.
S.A.
Last Sunday I watched a new release titled ‘The Exorcism of Emily Rose’. Unlike other movies about demonic possession, most notably ‘The Exorcist’, this particular feature does not subscribe to the school of swivelling heads and projectile vomiting. It also avoids the shocking, albeit amusing, sexual depravity portrayed by Linda Blair. Additionally, the demons in question here do not speak in an English accent, are short on swear words, and prefer ancient tongues to English.
The real events behind Emily Rose’s story are more shocking that the movie allows, but this is understandable given the director’s background. Director and co-writer Scott Derrickson is apparently a devout evangelical Christian – a churchgoer in other words. Although he may not subscribe to the Catholic tenets about possession and exorcism, the fact remains that he is a ‘believer’. As such, the movie goes ‘soft’ on the priest who sought to ‘exorcise’ Emily and further recommended that she cease taking her medication. Put simply, the viewer is left to interpret Emily as being either ‘mad’ or ‘possessed’. Given the numerous supernatural interludes, one would assume that the director is gunning for the latter assumption.
In the movie, Father Moore (played by Tom Wilkinson) is on trial for criminal negligence. He is represented by an ambitious female lawyer, Erin Brunner (played by Laura Linney), who describes herself as being agnostic, but gradually has her views swayed after waking repeatedly at 3am, described by Father Moore as the ‘witching hour’. She is further advised by Father Moore to take care, as "There are forces around this trial, dark and powerful forces."
Ooohhh …. Ooga booga.
OK, by now it must be apparent that I am something of a skeptic. Of course, I cannot explain with precision every ‘weird’ event which takes place in the world. However, I’ll be damned (no pun intended) if I seek to explain the inexplicable by reference to the unprovable (i.e. religious ideology, or rather ‘dogma’). For countless years, people have been using the mechanism of ‘fear’ as a means to coerce others to adopt their ideology. Accept Christ, or burn in hell for eternity – pray five times a day, or risk the wrath of Allah – don’t take a bite out of God’s apple, otherwise He’ll throw you out of Paradise …. It’s hard to see how Derrickson’s movie does anything different.
Fear of the irrational is something I have yet to come to grasps with. For example, after having watched the ‘Exorcism of Emily Rose’ I felt uneasy about crawling out of bed at 2:15am in order to take a much needed piss. Had I done so, my mind would have been replete with images of all manner of ‘dark beasts’ lurking in the shadows whilst my trembling hands struggled to find a light switch. This whole episode made me feel stupid and ashamed, especially after I relieved myself in an empty Sprite bottle and then proceeded to fall asleep once more (joke).
The fact remains that real life offers a great deal more to fear than fiction. For example, I often ask myself what I would fear more:
(i) one metre cockroach or Leader of the Opposition in a g-string;
(ii) demonic presence under my bed or threesome with Condoleeza Rice and Janet Reno;
(iii) a zombie or Phillip Ruddock (are the two even distinguishable?);
(iv) Lucifer in the flesh or being seriously ill with no medical insurance in the US;
(v) alien beings or being caught in a lift with several chronically flatulent vegetarians;
(vi) vampires or an international shortage of single malt scotch.
On second thought, The Exorcism of Emily Rose is about as scary as John Howard in a tutu compared to the more salient fears visible in our world.
S.A.
2 comments:
Hmmm … interesting observation Gizmo.
In all honesty, I have no idea what a dark supernatural presence would do if ‘tailing’ someone from one timezone to another. More pressingly, it would be interesting to know of the precise ‘window of opportunity’ available to dark forces at 3am. For example, do they have core operational hours similar to those in the public service? If yes, presumably that would be between 3-4am, as any period after that would ostensibly cease to be scary in the supernatural sense.
It’s quite obvious that employees of the ‘Demonic Real’ enjoy working conditions far superior to those of humans. They probably work less than 1.5 hours per day, given the fact that 3am is referred to as the ‘witching hour’. It’s difficult to see them working past 4:30am, as this would probably involve unnecessary overtime.
Additionally, the Scandinavian scenario in your post presents a problem. If summer presents 24 hours of daylight a day, dark forces may well have to work in the shadows, which means limited desk space and competition for viable worksites. Who knows … maybe they receive a hardship allowance for working in such conditions.
The fact remains that, as with the light, the dark can work in mysterious ways. The most difficult situation conceivable is one involving a perpetual jetsetter who seeks to avoid 3am in any part of the world at all costs. Having limited understandable of the workings of time and distance, I don’t know whether this is a viable option. At some point or another, these beings are bound to catch their target at 3am somewhere. Surrounding yourself with light may help, but even the innocuous act of sitting on a toilet and creating ‘dark’ between water in the bowl and your backside may present a significant problem. Evil is innovative if nothing else ….
Haha nice one(s).
And what if one is stuck on the toilet at 3am? It might explain my, um, 'lack of aim' last night... Suddenly it all makes sense. I better start loving Jesus quick smart.
Post a Comment