Inspiré du classique de 1983 de Roald Dahl, "Les sorcières" raconte l'histoire effrayante, drôle et imaginative d'un jeune garçon de sept ans qui a rencontré de vraies sorcières.Inspiré du classique de 1983 de Roald Dahl, "Les sorcières" raconte l'histoire effrayante, drôle et imaginative d'un jeune garçon de sept ans qui a rencontré de vraies sorcières.Inspiré du classique de 1983 de Roald Dahl, "Les sorcières" raconte l'histoire effrayante, drôle et imaginative d'un jeune garçon de sept ans qui a rencontré de vraies sorcières.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 10 nominations au total
Avis à la une
I'm sure people will hate this movie no matter what because they love the original and I get that but it's not bad at all. My kids loved it and love the original so they actually pulled it off in my opinion. People may also find other ways or reasons to hate it (probably involves current issues politics bs etc.) but seriously it's not bad. You also have to remember these movies are kids movies based on a kids book so if your pissed that a movie from your childhood has been remade, that's sad. At least they waited 30 years to do it. The first one is a lot scarier but that's because of the awesome makeup and not cgi.
Roald Dahl was my favorite author throughout my childhood and adolescence, and even now I still tremendously enjoy re-reading his novels, or - even better - reading them to my 8-year-old daughter. Of all the writers in the world and in history, Dahl created the most insanely imaginative fantasy worlds and the most colorfully eccentric characters. In every decade since the 1960s there has been at least one famous film adaptation of Dahl's work, and often they were helmed by some of the world's most acclaimed directors (like Nicholas Roeg, Steven Spielberg, Tim Burton, and now Robert Zemeckis)
"The Witches", Dahl's awesomely grim and eerie novel from 1983, already received a film version once in 1990, and - in my humble opinion - that version stood the test of time very well. Still, the skeptical author got to see it shortly before his death and didn't like it, so producer Guillermo Del Toro and director Robert Zemeckis considered it was time for a re-interpretation. The result is an overall enjoyable movie (or at least more enjoyable than what the harsh reviews around here claim), but nevertheless one with many shortcomings and tiny disappointments.
The narration of Chris Rock feels awkward and misfit from the very first minute. Although he never appears in the film, Rock's voice is supposedly the young and orphaned boy whom, together with his loving grandma, courageously confronts a whole coven of witches, and the diabolical Grand High Witch in particular, in a picturesque seaside hotel. While Octavia Spencer and the young Jahzir Bruno gave away likable performances, the frequent interruptions by Rock's irritating voice formed a nuisance to me. Furthermore, I read a lot of negative comments regarding Anna Hathaway's depiction of the Grand High Witch, but I honestly can say she's quite alright. Sure, she can't hold a candle to Anjelica Huston, who was born for the role, but I dug Hathaway's exaggeratedly nasty accent and her overacting.
The biggest default of the 2020 version, according to me, is how Dahl's vivid imaginary setting and lead characters were turned into uninspired and soulless CGI effects. Anjelica Huston's transformation into the Grand High Witch gave 9-year-old me nightmares for weeks, while there's nothing even remotely scary about her digital transformation here. Same goes for the kids turning into mice, and the legendary moment when all witches take their wigs off. These sequences are a lot less impactful and astonishing as in the 1990s version. I read somewhere that producer Guillermo Del Toro initially wanted the effects to be stop-motion. Why didn't he persist? He's the producer after all, and a classic Dahl story needs old-fashioned handicraft effects!
"The Witches", Dahl's awesomely grim and eerie novel from 1983, already received a film version once in 1990, and - in my humble opinion - that version stood the test of time very well. Still, the skeptical author got to see it shortly before his death and didn't like it, so producer Guillermo Del Toro and director Robert Zemeckis considered it was time for a re-interpretation. The result is an overall enjoyable movie (or at least more enjoyable than what the harsh reviews around here claim), but nevertheless one with many shortcomings and tiny disappointments.
The narration of Chris Rock feels awkward and misfit from the very first minute. Although he never appears in the film, Rock's voice is supposedly the young and orphaned boy whom, together with his loving grandma, courageously confronts a whole coven of witches, and the diabolical Grand High Witch in particular, in a picturesque seaside hotel. While Octavia Spencer and the young Jahzir Bruno gave away likable performances, the frequent interruptions by Rock's irritating voice formed a nuisance to me. Furthermore, I read a lot of negative comments regarding Anna Hathaway's depiction of the Grand High Witch, but I honestly can say she's quite alright. Sure, she can't hold a candle to Anjelica Huston, who was born for the role, but I dug Hathaway's exaggeratedly nasty accent and her overacting.
The biggest default of the 2020 version, according to me, is how Dahl's vivid imaginary setting and lead characters were turned into uninspired and soulless CGI effects. Anjelica Huston's transformation into the Grand High Witch gave 9-year-old me nightmares for weeks, while there's nothing even remotely scary about her digital transformation here. Same goes for the kids turning into mice, and the legendary moment when all witches take their wigs off. These sequences are a lot less impactful and astonishing as in the 1990s version. I read somewhere that producer Guillermo Del Toro initially wanted the effects to be stop-motion. Why didn't he persist? He's the producer after all, and a classic Dahl story needs old-fashioned handicraft effects!
The remake was okay but much lighter in tone than its predecessor and the cheesy humor was kinda cringeworthy. I would've preferred a much darker spin and more sinister vibe over this comical TV movie offering but oh well. Octavia was really good as always but the cheap CGI did let the movie down. It's also been very clear for a number of years now that Anne's forte are not accents. I mean she sounded comical and even Scottish in certain parts...like girl come on now. It goes without saying that Anjelica Huston's performance was much stronger and scarier in the 1990 version, but overall the cast, sets and writing were okay.
The Grand High Witch is killing it. but seriously, she's terrible.
From the start on, with the weird Chris Rock voice-over, this remake goes wrong wherever it can wrong. The acting is stiff, the focus is hardly on all the other witches, the CGI is not good. Even the housekeeping cart seems to come from the CGI box. Positive thing: Octavia Spencer is doing her best to be a genuine grandmother, and she succeeds, but that's about it.
OK, yes, I am a fan of the 1990 movie. Even though it wasn't as close to the original story, I really can't believe Roald Dahl would recognize his book in this mess. The first movie was gorgeous in it's authenticity. It has folklore, it has an edge, it has a heart. This is Hollywood factory work and seems to want to be much more than it can deliver. It made me miss much more than the purple glow in the witches eyes. It made me want to just throw up like a witch who smells children.
I'm not saying you shouldn't watch it. I am sure that an entire generation who never grew up with the original will disagree, but to me, this is like cursing in a church. It's horrible.
The original "The Witches" is a Childhood Classic that we all grew up watching & the setting & the actual Witches themselves looked way better back then in 1990 than these CGI creations look today in 2021.
Robert Zemeckis is an excellent director & he does good here but like every big film today it's overrealiant on CGI affects & even with it's mega budget it doesn't look as good or as richly beautiful as the darker original old Classic. Also the actors were alot better in the original as was the Hotel but as a new version as a fun fantasy adventure it's still a decent watch.
Anne Hathaway is good as the main head witch but again got nothing on the scariness of Angelica Huston.
The characters have changed to the cast of a Black version which was ok because i liked Chris Rock telling the story & Octavia Spencer is really good as the grandma who takes the little boy to a big beautiful Hotel to escape a Witch encounter but end up right in the middle of a Witches meeting place. Stanley Tucci is fine but felt very subdued & not fun like Rowan Atkinson's Classic part. The kids are fine & the CGI mice are cartoony looking but there is some Magic here & the story is pretty much exactly the same as the original but just not done as great.
Still this update is a fun film with decent performances & nice cinematography but it just ain't on the level of that Original Classic.
Robert Zemeckis is an excellent director & he does good here but like every big film today it's overrealiant on CGI affects & even with it's mega budget it doesn't look as good or as richly beautiful as the darker original old Classic. Also the actors were alot better in the original as was the Hotel but as a new version as a fun fantasy adventure it's still a decent watch.
Anne Hathaway is good as the main head witch but again got nothing on the scariness of Angelica Huston.
The characters have changed to the cast of a Black version which was ok because i liked Chris Rock telling the story & Octavia Spencer is really good as the grandma who takes the little boy to a big beautiful Hotel to escape a Witch encounter but end up right in the middle of a Witches meeting place. Stanley Tucci is fine but felt very subdued & not fun like Rowan Atkinson's Classic part. The kids are fine & the CGI mice are cartoony looking but there is some Magic here & the story is pretty much exactly the same as the original but just not done as great.
Still this update is a fun film with decent performances & nice cinematography but it just ain't on the level of that Original Classic.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe original 1983 novel was largely set in the United Kingdom (with a few scenes in Norway). This movie adaptation is set in the US state of Alabama, but, ironically, was mostly filmed in the United Kingdom (though some exteriors were shot in Alabama and Georgia). Octavia Spencer is originally from Alabama.
- GaffesNear the end at 1 hour 34 min Hero mouse references to Mary as Daisy although he learned earlier in the movie her real name and commented on it that it's pretty.
- Citations
[being cornered by her own cat]
Grand High Witch: Remember who it was who feeds you... No, don't think about food!
- Crédits fousRoald Dahl's credit is composed of items/people from his stories:
- R is a jar of dreams from "The BFG"
- O is a swollen Violet Beauregarde from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory"
- A is a stack of levitating books from "Matilda"
- L is a fox tail from "Fantastic Mr Fox"
- D is a giant peach hoisted by seagulls, from "James and the Giant Peach"
- Dahl is a Wonka chocolate candy bar containing a golden ticket from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory"
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Nostalgia Critic: The Witches (2020)
- Bandes originalesLittle Drummer Boy
Written by Katherine K. Davis, Henry Onorati, Harry Simeone
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Las brujas
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 203 571 $US
- Montant brut mondial
- 29 303 571 $US
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant