NOTE IMDb
5,3/10
4,5 k
MA NOTE
Christy retourne dans sa ville natale des années après l'accident de voiture qui a défiguré sa sœur aînée. Hantée par l'accident, elle apprend que ses pires cauchemars se sont réalisés - ou ... Tout lireChristy retourne dans sa ville natale des années après l'accident de voiture qui a défiguré sa sœur aînée. Hantée par l'accident, elle apprend que ses pires cauchemars se sont réalisés - ou sont sur le point de le faire.Christy retourne dans sa ville natale des années après l'accident de voiture qui a défiguré sa sœur aînée. Hantée par l'accident, elle apprend que ses pires cauchemars se sont réalisés - ou sont sur le point de le faire.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Julian Christopher
- Dr. Cestia
- (as Julian D. Christopher)
Avis à la une
Christy (Nora Zehetner) is haunted by her sister Vanessa's death. On her 14th birthday, Vanessa allowed her to drive the convertible. They had an accident and Vanessa got trapped and burnt. During her funeral, Christy was convinced that Vanessa was alive trapped in the closed coffin. In the present day, Christy returns home to attend a funeral. Vanessa's husband John Locke, her niece Amy, and John's strict French mother are still living at home. Christy is having hallucinations and suspects John of malfeasance as Vanessa's doctor but no one believes her. Amy suspects a ghostly presence in the home.
This seems to be a couple of production companies trying their hands at horror. It struggles to be anything new or compelling. It should have been a simple haunted house movie. Christy could stay with the Lockes and forced to stay to save Amy. That's what I assumed it was going for when she has her hallucinations in the house. Then she gets friends, has cops, and flashbacks to the hospital. It's trying to be a shocking story and it does have a great twist. The big Vanessa twist is completely predictable and tiresome as the reveal gets stretched out. The Amy twist is the much better one. This is a weak attempt.
This seems to be a couple of production companies trying their hands at horror. It struggles to be anything new or compelling. It should have been a simple haunted house movie. Christy could stay with the Lockes and forced to stay to save Amy. That's what I assumed it was going for when she has her hallucinations in the house. Then she gets friends, has cops, and flashbacks to the hospital. It's trying to be a shocking story and it does have a great twist. The big Vanessa twist is completely predictable and tiresome as the reveal gets stretched out. The Amy twist is the much better one. This is a weak attempt.
I expected a bit much, since I made the mistake to read the "Diamond among pearls" comment. Back to reality: the acting is mediocre towards bad, the story is boring and the scary stuff is just a girl having weird visions. The fact that overall it makes sense is a plus, especially for the "psychically sensitive girl that no one believes" subtype of the horror genre.
Bottom line: this is more of a psychic thriller and not a horror movie. The last part, while it conveniently ties all the loose ends, is way too convenient, more of a moral compromise that breaks the slightly better feel of the story coming to a quasi-logical finale. I can easily imagine all the actors playing in a third rate soap opera, so don't expect a lot better acting that that.
Bottom line: this is more of a psychic thriller and not a horror movie. The last part, while it conveniently ties all the loose ends, is way too convenient, more of a moral compromise that breaks the slightly better feel of the story coming to a quasi-logical finale. I can easily imagine all the actors playing in a third rate soap opera, so don't expect a lot better acting that that.
MTV films makes a really moody horror film. To be certain its the sort of thing thats been done before, but even then this has some genuine shivers and some creepy moments.
The basic plot has a young girl returning home when her old caretaker dies. The girl has a tragic past that includes the death of her sister after a fiery car crash. Plagued by visions and a sense that her sister was buried alive she begins to search for clues as to what happened seven years before.
This one came out of left field for me. I have vague notions about hearing about the film, but I never really remember seeing or hearing anything about it. I'm pretty sure that helped my enjoyment of the film since I had no preconceived notions for it.
Looking like TV movie with interiors that remind one more of a set than of a real place this film over comes its limitations (and occasional WTF moment) to play out almost as if its an extended Tales from the Darkside or other similar horror anthology show. Odd shifts in perspective, some genuine creepy, but not too in your face imagery and willingness to go sans blood and guts except as required make this pretty much a throw back to the old days of horror when less is more. Its not perfect but even with its flaws and the following of a well worn path at times this still manages to be a solid little thriller of the B variety.
Worth a rental with a bag of popcorn and a soda.(Though don't buy this just yet -its a bare bones release that they want almost 30 dollars list for- too much for too little)
The basic plot has a young girl returning home when her old caretaker dies. The girl has a tragic past that includes the death of her sister after a fiery car crash. Plagued by visions and a sense that her sister was buried alive she begins to search for clues as to what happened seven years before.
This one came out of left field for me. I have vague notions about hearing about the film, but I never really remember seeing or hearing anything about it. I'm pretty sure that helped my enjoyment of the film since I had no preconceived notions for it.
Looking like TV movie with interiors that remind one more of a set than of a real place this film over comes its limitations (and occasional WTF moment) to play out almost as if its an extended Tales from the Darkside or other similar horror anthology show. Odd shifts in perspective, some genuine creepy, but not too in your face imagery and willingness to go sans blood and guts except as required make this pretty much a throw back to the old days of horror when less is more. Its not perfect but even with its flaws and the following of a well worn path at times this still manages to be a solid little thriller of the B variety.
Worth a rental with a bag of popcorn and a soda.(Though don't buy this just yet -its a bare bones release that they want almost 30 dollars list for- too much for too little)
Anyone who is nitpicking at this movie over ridiculous things such as "do school websites list past students' phone numbers" and "this character would've/should've/could've not let the younger sister drive" should be ignored.
Films are made for viewers willing to allow the film to take them where it will. If the film is imperfect, the real film lover will still attempt to see it for what it wanted to be; for what it's actual *point* was. That is, of course, assuming there is one.
On the other hand, there will always be the wannabe Sherlock Holmes of film fandom, who will pick at the silliest details as if a movie somehow needs to be a fully provable mathematical truth.
Silly.
On to the film.
I must say, it is a typical thriller with horror elements taking place in a typical old house with typically hidden "creatures" and such, where the main character attempts to uncover a mystery until in the end -- surprise. If you want to understand what this film's atmosphere is like, think of "A Tale of Two Sisters" and "The Others" (with Kidman).
Is the movie super-successful at what it does? I wouldn't say so. I will say, though, that it was certainly not a failure either. In fact, "willing viewers," as described above -- in other words, those viewers who have managed to retain their childlike sense of wonder and innocence when they sit down to watch a film -- should be left completely unaware until the final revelation.
And let me tell you, mate, if you have any kind of compassion for the characters you see on screen and think the value of cinema lies partly in you allowing yourself to become emotionally involved with them (as opposed to analyzing their every action like some goofs will inevitably always do), you will be horrified at the ending. Bleedin' horrified. Not that it's particularly "scary" in the typical horror film sense, but because of the human suffering and injustice involved.
Ignore the yapping cynics and enjoy this perfectly acceptable entry into the spooky-family-in-an-old-house-with-a-dark-secret roster. However, allow me to still add that that if you are looking for a movie along this theme and want one that is *really* well done, watch "A Tale of Two Sisters" instead.
Films are made for viewers willing to allow the film to take them where it will. If the film is imperfect, the real film lover will still attempt to see it for what it wanted to be; for what it's actual *point* was. That is, of course, assuming there is one.
On the other hand, there will always be the wannabe Sherlock Holmes of film fandom, who will pick at the silliest details as if a movie somehow needs to be a fully provable mathematical truth.
Silly.
On to the film.
I must say, it is a typical thriller with horror elements taking place in a typical old house with typically hidden "creatures" and such, where the main character attempts to uncover a mystery until in the end -- surprise. If you want to understand what this film's atmosphere is like, think of "A Tale of Two Sisters" and "The Others" (with Kidman).
Is the movie super-successful at what it does? I wouldn't say so. I will say, though, that it was certainly not a failure either. In fact, "willing viewers," as described above -- in other words, those viewers who have managed to retain their childlike sense of wonder and innocence when they sit down to watch a film -- should be left completely unaware until the final revelation.
And let me tell you, mate, if you have any kind of compassion for the characters you see on screen and think the value of cinema lies partly in you allowing yourself to become emotionally involved with them (as opposed to analyzing their every action like some goofs will inevitably always do), you will be horrified at the ending. Bleedin' horrified. Not that it's particularly "scary" in the typical horror film sense, but because of the human suffering and injustice involved.
Ignore the yapping cynics and enjoy this perfectly acceptable entry into the spooky-family-in-an-old-house-with-a-dark-secret roster. However, allow me to still add that that if you are looking for a movie along this theme and want one that is *really* well done, watch "A Tale of Two Sisters" instead.
Safe MTV produced chiller that finds Nora Zehetner haunted by images linked to the horrific death of her elder sister when she was a little girl. The frustrating thing is that the picture is book ended by great horror sequences, in fact the finale is one of the best that horror offered up in 2007 if judged on rug pull and macabre terms, if only the whole middle section didn't meander along without thoughtful scares or adherence to screw tightening genre requirements.
The set up is pretty good, it's a classic spooky house scenario with secret passages and rooms you wouldn't want to be alone in. The inhabitants of the house feature a suspicious but angelic little girl, and a Mrs. Danvers scary woman type. Director Dagen Merrill does his best to bring the frights, but he's heavy handed in execution, while the cheapness of the production unfortunately stands out a mile. That said, there's enough here to warrant interest if stuck for a spooky thriller to watch on a cold night in by the fire. Certainly the finale is worth time spent with the weak middle section. 6/10
The set up is pretty good, it's a classic spooky house scenario with secret passages and rooms you wouldn't want to be alone in. The inhabitants of the house feature a suspicious but angelic little girl, and a Mrs. Danvers scary woman type. Director Dagen Merrill does his best to bring the frights, but he's heavy handed in execution, while the cheapness of the production unfortunately stands out a mile. That said, there's enough here to warrant interest if stuck for a spooky thriller to watch on a cold night in by the fire. Certainly the finale is worth time spent with the weak middle section. 6/10
Le saviez-vous
- GaffesWhen Christy Wescot (Nora Zehetner) goes to Amy Locke (Jessica Amlee)'s room for the first night, a camera takes her picture, it's clearly a compact digital camera on a tripod, but it sounds like an SLR camera. Then Amy tells Christy that she has set the camera to take picture every half an hour to picture the dark thing. Later Amy is showing Christy photos taken with the camera from two nights ago, and although earlier we saw the camera was on a tripod, but the frame in the photos change in each picture.
- Crédits fousThe end credits go down rather than up (as is usual).
- ConnexionsReferences En quatrième vitesse (1955)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Beneath?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 22min(82 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant