En 1967 à Los Angeles, une veuve et ses filles rajoutent un numéro à leur arnaque de spiritisme en invitant une présence diabolique chez elles, sans réaliser les risques qu'elles courent.En 1967 à Los Angeles, une veuve et ses filles rajoutent un numéro à leur arnaque de spiritisme en invitant une présence diabolique chez elles, sans réaliser les risques qu'elles courent.En 1967 à Los Angeles, une veuve et ses filles rajoutent un numéro à leur arnaque de spiritisme en invitant une présence diabolique chez elles, sans réaliser les risques qu'elles courent.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires et 7 nominations au total
Avis à la une
Keeping it simple is what worked out well for the film, despite thematically borrowed from others, scenes were kind of familiar and characters intentionally developed. Particularly the priest role was the most overused in any horror film. Followed by the twist. That turning point was good, but not a new. Nice performances and well shot film. Ouija is a fine concept for a horror theme and with this film's somewhat success, I hope the next one would only get better. So it is worth a watch, if you're not anticipating a something special.
6/10
It's obvious that Mike Flannigan is on his way to becoming one of our true masters of horror, but this film seems more like a paycheck movie for him and it shows. He does the best he can with the tepid material, but ends up using the old "distorted faces/mouths with rolled back eyes" effect a few too many times and it quickly becomes tedious.
Like all of Flannigan's films, it's wonderfully well cast and beautifully put together. I just wish they'd spent a little bit more time with the script. You might be better off watching Flannigan's Hush, Absentia, Gerald's Game, Occulus, or The Haunting of Hill House.
Perhaps it should not come as a surprise that "O of E" turned out so well. With the steady guidance of director Mike Flanagan (Hush, Oculus, Haunting of Hill House), one of the most consistent creators of scary stories in the business, we should expect high quality work. Once again, he delivers.
The story revolves around a recently widowed mother and her two daughters. At risk of losing their old, creepy and possibly haunted (definitely haunted) house, the mother resorts to work as a fake medium to make money, calling on her daughters to contribute to the ruse. Things get more exciting when the mother brings home a Ouija board, not knowing that sinister spirits would soon possess her younger daughter.
Then, as we witness the little girl's behavior grow increasingly strange, our goosebumps grow increasingly prevalent (because creepy little girls are a reliably freaky scary movie trope). The older sister soon suspects something, the little girl crawls on walls, and a priest shows up to help. That stuff is predictable and somewhat unoriginal. But this movie still works because of its splendid acting - the little girl, Doris (Lulu Wilson), is particularly impressive - and deft direction.
Mike Flanagan clearly knows how to run the show. He makes sure that "O of E" becomes a far cry from other horror movies of this ilk, which possess so little inventiveness in their direction.
With this film, we are treated to elegant camera movement, unnerving closeups, and evocative framing and angle choices that all appear purposeful and thought through. Instead of calling attention to an evil presence on screen with a hard cut, we simply see a shadowy figure crouching on the edge of the frame.
Flanagan also chooses to include limited jump scares and, mercifully, no fake jump scares. Fake jump scares are what I call those moments of building tension when the sound goes silent, then suddenly there's a blast of jarring noise that makes us jump out of our seats as the camera reveals a harmless friend character. It's a cheap manipulation, a dirty trick. We deserve better, and Flanagan gives us better.
Rather than turning to a loud and bombastic score to sell scares, Flanagan relies on the editing and our natural inclinations as viewers to feel scared. He trusts that when something scary that unexpectedly appears in front of us on screen, it will deliver chills.
"O of E" delivers a slow-building eerie viewing experience. There are no excessive bursts of violence. Nothing is over-the-top. It's a small-scale movie, but one that is nonetheless effective. I recommend it to any fans of possession movies, especially if you prefer ones devoid of gore.
At the end of the final act, I was thinking "high-fives all-around, good job guys" and was about to give this two thumbs up.
And then, inexplicably, in the last 5 minutes the filmmakers revert to cheesy B-horror cliches making for a jarring denoument that simply feels wrong.
WTF? Was that studio exec interference or just plain bad judgement? Nope. Because it's a prequel (to a movie I haven't seen yet), I guess it had to end with a bridge to the other movie. But it could have and should have been better, so the truth is, it's just bad writing. The last few minutes just don't match the tone or narrative arc of the first hour and a half, and it comes across feeling like a cheap add-on. Not a twist ("cool!"), or a surprise ("gotcha!") just lame ("seriously? Pffthtttt!") (That's the raspberry sound, BTW.)
This movie should have wrapped up nicely at 1:27:25. If it had: 8/10.
With the dopey last 4 and a half minutes added: 6/10.
PS - If you can, stop watching at 1:27:25 and just imagine a better CODA; e.g., Lana, the sensible one, getting on with her life as best she can, and the Ouija board washing up on some beach like in Jumanji.
First off, the scenes were beautiful. It was like watching a warm sunset. In addition, the direction and camera angles really enhanced the suspense and intensity. The special effects were also top notch and at one point I was like, "Whaaaat? That is cool".
I was pretty captivated throughout, although it did have it's clunky moments but not too many of them and they quickly worked their way out of them.
The cast did a superb job with the young Lulu Wilson pretty much stealing the show. I'll most likely be seeing her again in my nightmares. Annalise Basso, Elizabeth Reaser and Henry Thomas also did an excellent job so I don't want to sell them short either.
Overall this was a pleasant surprise with moments of nail-biting suspense. Definitely worth the watch on a dark and quiet night. Oh, and one other reviewer mentioned not watching the preview. I didn't so that might have helped.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe film was shot digitally, but director and editor Mike Flanagan, in order to add a retro feel to the film, added elements in post-production to give the appearance of a movie shot on film. Those include the 'cigarette burns', marks that appear every 20 minutes or so in the upper right corner of the frame, which were used to signal a change of reels for film projected.
- GaffesIn order to make the film appear more authentic for the time in which it is set (1967), cue marks, or "reel change" marks, are inserted at approximately every 20 minutes. However, the marks are oval when they should actually be circular, since this is a film presented in a 1.85:1 aspect ratio and not in a 2.39:1 aspect ratio. The only time the marks should be oval is if a film is projected with an anamorphic lens. On an anamorphic film print, the cue marks are circular, but the anamorphic lens makes the circle look like an oval when projected on a screen.
- Citations
Doris Zander: Wanna hear something cool?
Mikey: Sure.
Doris Zander: Do you know what it feels like to be strangled to death? First, you feel the pressure in your throat. Your eyes water, and you start to taste something very, very sour in your mouth. Then it's like someone lights a match right in the middle of your chest, and that fire grows. It fills your lungs, and your throat, and all the way behind your eyes. And finally, that fire turns to ice; like pins and needles of ice are sticking into your fingers, your toes, your arms. You see stars, then darkness. And the last thing you feel... is cold.
[Mikey looks confused and horrified]
Doris Zander: [smiles] Goodnight, Romeo.
- Crédits fousThere is a post-credits scene with Lin Shaye.
- Bandes originalesYou Gotta Move Me
Written by Dennis Michael Lacey
Performed by Mike Lacey
Courtesy of Crucial Music Corporation
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Ouija: Origin of Evil?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Ouija: el origen del mal
- Lieux de tournage
- Clark Residences - 306 Loma Drive, Los Angeles, Californie, États-Unis(the girl's school)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 9 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 35 144 505 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 14 065 500 $US
- 23 oct. 2016
- Montant brut mondial
- 81 705 746 $US
- Durée1 heure 39 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1