Friday, September 09, 2005

The Exorcism of Emily Rose

I haven't seen the movie yet, but the ads leave little doubt that it's a load of brain-dead religious nonsense. Slate's film critic, David Edelstein weighs in:


The religious horror picture The Exorcism of Emily Rose (Screen Gems) is the latest and tackiest assault on the reality-based secular community—just the kind of propaganda that's not supposed to be coming from ultraliberalcommiejewfag Hollywood. It goes even further than the religious horror picture Signs, which suggests that if you don't believe in God you can't possibly protect your kids from demonic aliens. This one says that if you believe in medical science over prayer, you not only can't protect your kids, you suppress the spiritual antibodies they need to fight the devil. Take a pill and you're all Satan's.


And my favorite part:


For all its cheap ghost-movie effects, the film aspires to something larger: the idea—one of the chief talking points for proponents of Intelligent Design as their “scholarship” is shot down—that even if we can't scientifically prove the existence of the Almighty (and the demons who try to undo his work), we must open ourselves to that possibility and recognize it as valid. Certainly it is as valid as that other, godless way of looking at the world. And it's more imperative: We dismiss the battle for our souls at our peril.

7 Comments:

At 4:18 PM, Anonymous J. J. Ramsey said...

Roger Ebert seemed to come to the exact opposite conclusion in his review. According to him, the movie remained intentionally ambiguous, not making it clear whether the prosecution or the defense was right. Some of the comments on IMDB seem to confirm this ambiguity.

I wonder if we're going to see reviews from Christians complaining that the movie was biased against belief in demons. Maybe this is a movie is so in the middle that those at the extremes of both sides will end up complaining that the movie is biased against them. :-)

 
At 6:19 PM, Blogger Jason said...

J.J.-

Thanks for the link. As I said, my impression from the ads and previews I've seen is that Edelstein is correct, but maybe not.

On the other hand, I find I often disagree with Ebert about movies. But I'm told that he's a fairly serious chess player, so I like him anyway!

Maybe I'll have to go see the movie after all...

 
At 8:15 PM, Blogger Speedkill said...

Maybe not the best source, but AgapePress says the same thing as Ebert.

 
At 10:23 PM, Blogger Joshua said...

totally! anyone who believes in christianity is brain dead!

ya know, when you make such a comment, you totally invalidate all of your arguments. why should anyone take anything you say seriously when you make such arrogant, bigoted remarks?

 
At 9:32 AM, Anonymous spencer said...

totally! anyone who believes in christianity is brain dead!

Uh, Joshua, that's not what jason wrote.

If you're going to get all huffy and whatnot, you might want to confine your outrage to things other people actually write, instead of what you imagine they might be thinking.

 
At 11:13 AM, Blogger Jason said...

Joshua-

What arrogant, bigoted remarks are you talking about? Kindly be specific if you are going to leave irate comments,

 
At 4:53 PM, Blogger Oolon Colluphid said...

To take another tack, it's no good to go protesting against a view (which wasn't even stated) that all Christians are brain dead in such in a way which provides that position a confirming anecdote for all to see.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home