Father Richard Moore (Tom Wilkinson, “Batman Begins”) is on trial. His lawyer, agnostic Erin Bruner (Laura Linney, “Kinsey”), thinks he should take a deal, her employers and the Catholic Archdiocese all thinking their interests would be better served if this case just went away. But Father Moore won’t have it. He wants the story of what happened told. Not his story, mind you, but Emily’s, the story of her exorcism.

Based on a true story (although it’s pretty obvious some of this has been embellished), “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” wants desperately to be the “Rashoman” of biblical horror movies. To say it isn’t really shouldn’t come as a surprise, especially when the only thing on director Scott Derrickson’s resume is the straight-to-video sequel “Hellraiser: Inferno.” But, to say it is no better than a rather routine episode of “Law and Order,” especially with a cast featuring three Oscar nominees (Linney, Wilkinson and Shohreh Aghdashloo, “House of Sand and Fog”) and one member who’s long overdue for one (Cambell Scott, “The Spanish Prisoner”), isn’t just surprising, it’s almost criminal.

Told in flashback through the testimony in Father Moore’s trial, the film attempts to show why the Catholic Church officially recognized Emily Rose (Jennifer Carpenter, “White Chicks”) as being worthy of an exorcism. As each person takes the stand, they try to let viewers in on Emily’s mindset, relating what occurred the first night she felt she heard voices, was assaulted by spirits and thought she saw demons walking down the street staring at her in the cold winter’s rain. They show us how a pretty, determined 19-year-old small town farm girl could claw the plaster off her bedroom wall, attack members of her own family and speak with six different voices in just as many languages, languages she should not even know.

They tell the viewer many things, some interesting, some not, but none of them actually ever tell us who Emily Rose really was. For all Father Moore’s bellyaching to the contrary, this isn’t her story, it is Erin’s, and as good as Linney is (and she’s exceptional) I can’t help but feel this is exactly the wrong way for things to go. As a viewer, I don’t care if the attorney comes to realize defending murderers and scumbags for a living might be morally repugnant. It doesn’t matter to me that by trail’s end she maybe comes to a decision to take a firm look at her own personal religious and moral beliefs. Nice, sure, but I wanted to know more about Emily, and for a movie where everyone insists it is her story that is the most important it’s the one story I hardly ever heard an insightful word or two about.

Don’t get me wrong. Emily sure as heck freaked me out a time or two, and those taped sounds of her during the initial exorcism can’t help but get under a person’s skin. Better, for all of Derrickson’s faults as a writer (he co-wrote the screenplay with Paul Harris Boardman), I have to admit he shows promise as a visualist. There are some images here that gave me some legitimate goosebumps, scenes of Emily’s hallucinatory state and of the demons haunting her enough to make even the biggest atheist in the audience ponder saying a Hail Mary or two just for good luck.

But, even then, it’s still not scary, and for a horror tale that is a cardinal sin. No mater how unsettling things get here or there I can’t actually say I found myself ever feeling afraid. Instead, I think I was actually more bored than anything else. Let’s be clear. If it weren’t for the stunning cast of character actors (which includes Henry Czerny, “Clear and Present Danger,” and Colm Feore, “The Chronicles of Riddick”) we wouldn’t even be giving this picture the time of day. Sure it’s fine from a technical standpoint (and with some of the best craftsmen around, veterans of fair like “Million Dollar Baby,” “My Own Private Idaho” and “The Good Girl,” it sure better be) but that doesn’t make it interesting. In fact, it is only the strength of the performances that kept me even remotely curious as to what would happen next, not exactly a reason to strike the gong and start singing, “Hallelujah!”

Too bad, because there is a spooky little meditation on the true nature of faith desperately trying to get out of Derrickson and Boardman’s screenplay. The director wants to make viewers question why they spiritually believe the way they do. To his credit, he does not take sides, doesn’t make people absorb his own personal views on the subject. Instead, like with Erin, he leaves it open to interpretation, letting audience’s make up their own minds. I’ll give him credit there, but I’ll also take it away just as quickly for never getting me to actually care. In fact, the only thing exorcised by “The Exorcism of Emily Rose” was my interest.

Film Rating: êê  (out of 4)