As scary as some horror films are, there’s often a comfortable gulf the viewer can cross after the credits roll. They toss the popcorn bin in the trash or put on some music; perhaps say goodbye to friends, maybe head on to a shower and bed. And this process comes easier when the director or screenwriter have given us implausible or outright ridiculous scenarios and antagonists. I mentioned in my review for Black Water that one of the reasons that film succeeded is because it is based on real saltwater crocodile behavior. But you’d still have to travel to the southern hemisphere for a chance to face down such a beast. The Exorcism of Emily Rose gives us an enemy that could be lurking around every corner, and in this author’s opinion is.

That made the film terrifying for me, but Director Scott Derrickson seems to posit that the alternative is worse–facing this evil without the safety provided by having the Big “G” God on your side. There are scenes in Emily Rose that stand as some of the most harrowing I’ve seen in cinema. And it’s all inserted into a smart, compelling courtroom drama that sees Laura Linney and Tom Wilkinson playing an ambitious lawyer and a Catholic Priest on trial for an exorcism that seemingly went wrong.

I should point out that all this is claimed to be based on a true story, and it is to a limited extent. Anneliese Michel was a young German woman who may or may not have suffered from epilepsy. Or she may or may not have been victim of a demonic possession. The two priests that attempted to exorcise said alleged demon? Criminally negligent and guilty of involuntary manslaughter. Or well-meaning men of God who were her last chance.

There are big questions being asked of the audience. This is not the kind of foray into the cinema one would have taken alongside a bunch of giggling teenagers. This is a thinking man’s horror movie, and in my opinion almost criminally underrated.

It starts with Linney’s Erin Bruner taking an assignment she believes will make her partner at the law firm she practices for. A young woman is dead following a series of attempted exorcisms, and the Catholic Church has an interest in seeing the priest involved go free. All this fire and brimstone stuff is secondary to Bruner’s long-term goals. Yet from her first encounter with beleaguered Father Richard Moore (Wilkinson), her perceptions are tested. When another man of God (played here by Campbell Scott in a solid bit of acting) is selected as lead prosecutor, Erin quickly realizes her work is cut out for her. She’s still viewing this in terms of secular legal gamesmanship, but as the trial unfolds, Erin comes under attack from hostile forces she struggles to understand, and she begins to realize there is far more at stake than simply her promotion.

The bulk of the trial, of course, deals with past events, but having the foreknowledge that Emily Rose did not survive doesn’t make her downward spiral any easier to watch. It’s here that Jennifer Carpenter, in a breakout performance, brings Emily Rose’s alleged-possession to life in a way that never feels derivative of the few dozen other films that have dabbled in these tropes. Carpenter should, in my opinion, have garnered some kind of Academy Award. She has created a riveting, horrific portrayal of possession that makes her moments on screen so impactful we feel we are looking down a dark pit. There are a few shots in the film that rely almost solely on her ability. One scene in particular comes out of the blue after Rose spends the night in a friend’s dorm room. What he sees the following morning might be, in my opinion, the scariest moment of any horror film I’ve encountered, and its almost all the product of Carpenter’s acting.

There’s a little CGI at work in Emily Rose, but the film leans on restraint as much as possible. This was a smart move on the part of the director and cinematographer.

Because we need to believe in the possibility of what Emily Rose endured. The story wouldn’t work half as well, and the movie would fall apart, without both legs of the supernatural and plausible being supported. Interestingly, and perhaps not accidentally, the mundane explanations and recreations are less gripping and less compelling.

There’s the usual spate of witnesses and drama-filled objections and counter-objections in the courtroom that feed the nearly parallel story there. With a little editing, this could almost be two separate movies. That would have been a shame, though, because The Exorcism of Emily Rose is just about a perfectly plotted and paced film as it stands.

So of course many critics were lukewarm to the movie and dragged out their usual list of Highly Credible Overthought Reasons they Could Not Like This. And I just can’t wrap my head around why that was the overall reaction. This is everything critics normally say they want in a horror film. It’s smart, well-written and legitimately scary. Pardon the pun, but I don’t know what possessed them.

This wraps up our review series. I’ve really enjoyed bringing you a different look at some solid recent horror films over the past month. Hopefully I’ve provided you with some surprises and added a few movies to your watch lists. What are some of your favorites? Just comment below.

And be safe out there. Halloween is on the way. And you never know what might be watching.