This film goes into wide release on Friday, and the reviews are mediocre.

It’s based on a true story, of a German woman named Anneliese Michel, who died after attempted exorcisms, and the priests involved were put on trial for and convicted of manslaughter.

The negativity in the reviews seem to stem from a suspicion that the filmmaker has an agenda of sorts, that he’s trying to bring the viewer into the belief that the spiritual realm is real. At the NYTimes, A.O. Scott gets his dander up about this:

The movie pretends to take the same tolerant, anything’s-possible position. While not especially good – judged strictly on its cinematic merits, it ranges from O.K. to god-awful – it is still a fascinating cultural document in the age of intelligent design. Its point of view suggests an improbable alliance of postmodern relativism and absolute religious faith against the supposed tyranny of scientific empiricism, which is depicted as narrow and dogmatic.

What a fascinating paragraph. "…a fascinating cultural document in the age of intelligent design," as if a belief in the supernatural is some sort of freakish early 21st century hiccup, and a work of art that reflects such a belief is a curiosity. Wow. Scott needs to get out more.

Well, I haven’t seen the film, so I can’t judge it. Perhaps it is preaching and manipulative. Some of you might be able to report later. But until then, this lengthy interview with Scott Derrickson, the film’s co-writer and director, at Peter Chattaway’s blog.