NOTE IMDb
5,5/10
46 k
MA NOTE
Une jeune femme institutionnalisée est terrorisée par un fantôme.Une jeune femme institutionnalisée est terrorisée par un fantôme.Une jeune femme institutionnalisée est terrorisée par un fantôme.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
D.R. Anderson
- Roy
- (as Dan Anderson)
Andrea Petty
- Mrs. Hudson
- (as Andrea L. Petty)
Tracy Schornick
- Cop #1
- (as Tracey Schornick)
Avis à la une
I'm giving this a six because of some of the performances and John Carpenters ability's to make me jump from time to time. The stand out jump scene for me was when they are going up in this lift which is probably more for objects than people. Also watch out for the scene in the morgue, just a warning! Anyway without giving too much away this film has a dark tone with very familiar characters to other movies like ' 'Girl Interrupted' or One flew over the Cuckoo's Neck, yet it would have to do a lot deeper to be considered in that bracket of great movies. It resembles something closer to 'Stonehearst Asylum' in the way it's more horror than emotionally grounded to the workings of a psychiatric ward. With the ghost of Alice Hudson into the mix haunting it's patients, Kristen (Amber Heard) sets her sights on finding out what is really going on here. But is the haunting happening internally or externally? Do we believe the patients are all seeing this ghost?
Like many have said previously in their reviews this brings nothing new to horror that we haven't seen before, therefore why is it worth your time? Well if nothing else, anybody who particularly likes horror might enjoy the effects, sound and score which John Carpenter puts together in such tantalising form it's like he never went away from directing on this comeback film. Also worth a mention is the performances for what appears to be low budget. Amber alongside Mamie Gummer give top notch believable acting which adds to the suspense in certain scenes. (Mamie Gummer) Emily I have learned is the daughter of Meryl Streep which is a tough act to follow, although she standsout here!
This movie doesn't have much in retrospect depth wise as it is pretty much a one dimensional tale with a twist at the end that leaves you feeling cheated. Like was any of it actually real kinda feeling? In hindsight we the audience know it all too well for these psychiatric ward type films. Not to say this is rubbish it just isn't anything special or overly memorable.
Like many have said previously in their reviews this brings nothing new to horror that we haven't seen before, therefore why is it worth your time? Well if nothing else, anybody who particularly likes horror might enjoy the effects, sound and score which John Carpenter puts together in such tantalising form it's like he never went away from directing on this comeback film. Also worth a mention is the performances for what appears to be low budget. Amber alongside Mamie Gummer give top notch believable acting which adds to the suspense in certain scenes. (Mamie Gummer) Emily I have learned is the daughter of Meryl Streep which is a tough act to follow, although she standsout here!
This movie doesn't have much in retrospect depth wise as it is pretty much a one dimensional tale with a twist at the end that leaves you feeling cheated. Like was any of it actually real kinda feeling? In hindsight we the audience know it all too well for these psychiatric ward type films. Not to say this is rubbish it just isn't anything special or overly memorable.
The Ward is an adequate horror film but could have been directed by anyone; after such a long hiatus one would expect John Carpenter to produce something much, much better.
The film suffers from a fairly weak script (not penned by Carpenter) and the big "surprise" ending is easily deduced very early in the film. As other reviewers here have noted, the "horror" elements are basically comprised of things jumping out variety; if you expect mood and atmosphere (e.g. Escape from NY, The Thing, Prince of Darkness)--THINK AGAIN.
It would appear the film was made on an extremely low budget; 95% of the movie takes place indoors; most of it in just a few rooms. The set design adequately portrays 1966 (the film's setting), however the wardrobe, makeup and hairstyles of the primary actresses are anachronistic and undermine suspension of disbelief.
Let me expand on that last point as it betrays an artistic compromise I was surprised to see JC make; every one of the main actresses is dolled up--in a modern way. Their hair is cut, dyed, streaked, and styled in a completely modern manner. And although they're supposedly in a mental ward, they apparently put copious amounts of makeup on each and every day. And it's not old-style makeup; in one scene, a female lead character is clearly wearing lip gloss. One woman wears Ronsir Shuron (geek) glasses, however her look is much more "hipster" than it is authentic. Oh, the clothes the "patients" wear--let's just say they're colorful and fabulous...not what I'd expect to find in a mid-60s mental ward. One more thing in this area; all the primary women actresses are beautiful. This is a common element in modern "horror" films where style trumps substance; unfortunately I expected JC to make more of an effort to set an atmosphere where I'm less likely to ogle the actresses than I am to be sucked into the nightmare he's trying to portray.
Having seen every Carpenter film (in the theatre) over the past 30 years, I am disappointed that I was forced to watch the master release this nearly direct-to-DVD title. If you're a JC fan, by all means watch this, but don't expect more than a slightly above-average horror film. The biggest disappointment is that the film was directed by Carpenter and I'm left wondering if this is the best he can do, or if he was hemmed in by a small budget and producers who demanded he make a more cookie-cutter type film.
The film suffers from a fairly weak script (not penned by Carpenter) and the big "surprise" ending is easily deduced very early in the film. As other reviewers here have noted, the "horror" elements are basically comprised of things jumping out variety; if you expect mood and atmosphere (e.g. Escape from NY, The Thing, Prince of Darkness)--THINK AGAIN.
It would appear the film was made on an extremely low budget; 95% of the movie takes place indoors; most of it in just a few rooms. The set design adequately portrays 1966 (the film's setting), however the wardrobe, makeup and hairstyles of the primary actresses are anachronistic and undermine suspension of disbelief.
Let me expand on that last point as it betrays an artistic compromise I was surprised to see JC make; every one of the main actresses is dolled up--in a modern way. Their hair is cut, dyed, streaked, and styled in a completely modern manner. And although they're supposedly in a mental ward, they apparently put copious amounts of makeup on each and every day. And it's not old-style makeup; in one scene, a female lead character is clearly wearing lip gloss. One woman wears Ronsir Shuron (geek) glasses, however her look is much more "hipster" than it is authentic. Oh, the clothes the "patients" wear--let's just say they're colorful and fabulous...not what I'd expect to find in a mid-60s mental ward. One more thing in this area; all the primary women actresses are beautiful. This is a common element in modern "horror" films where style trumps substance; unfortunately I expected JC to make more of an effort to set an atmosphere where I'm less likely to ogle the actresses than I am to be sucked into the nightmare he's trying to portray.
Having seen every Carpenter film (in the theatre) over the past 30 years, I am disappointed that I was forced to watch the master release this nearly direct-to-DVD title. If you're a JC fan, by all means watch this, but don't expect more than a slightly above-average horror film. The biggest disappointment is that the film was directed by Carpenter and I'm left wondering if this is the best he can do, or if he was hemmed in by a small budget and producers who demanded he make a more cookie-cutter type film.
I'm 36 years old and in 1981 the first horror movie I saw was John Carpenters "Halloween". I was 6 year old and subsequently I became an úber fan of the Director. I've worshiped the great ones (Assault on precinct 13, Halloween, The Fog, Escape from New York, The Thing, Prince of Darkness) enjoyed the good (Christine, Star Man, Big Trouble in little China, They Live, In the mouth of madness, Vampires) and stomached the bad (Escape from L.A, Village of the damned, Memoirs
, Ghosts of Mars). "The Ward" seems to fall into all of these categories. Sometimes it's great, more often than not it's good but regrettably when it's bad it's really bad. Perhaps it was the lack of a traditional Carpenter score (although the score by Mark Kilian is suitably haunting, memorable and atmospheric) or maybe it was the somewhat derivative "jump" scares or could it have been the inconsistent overall tone because to me it felt like I was watching a movie made by someone trying to emulate Carpenter rather than a movie by "The Master" himself. Don't get me wrong, technically it's excellent and it contains a few moments of genuine tension but there was something missing from the ingredients that make a great Carpenter movie and I think that something is called suspense. It's a shame really because with its eerie location, its linear, albeit uninspired storyline and its quirky characters this had the potential to bring the Director back to the top where he truthfully belongs but throughout I couldn't help feel that Carpenter's become jaded within the genre. His techniques that were groundbreaking during his prime have been exploited by every other Horror Director of the last 20 years. So instead of evolving above this and carving a revolutionary way forward as he once did so gracefully, Carpenters now imitating his old self and his techniques just don't seem to cut it anymore. To be fair it's an enjoyable and fast moving 88 minutes but from an old Pro like John Carpenter I was expecting something a lot more terrifying. When Carpenter reviewed his initial cut of "The Fog" back in 79 he found it plodding and just not scary enough so he went back and re-shot scenes then re-cut it into the classic it is today. I think if Carpenter had taken the same approach with this movie it could've been up there with the best of the best but something tells me that he's become indifferent, lost his passion and dare I say "only in it for the money". Over time I may grow to love this like I grew to love "Prince of Darkness" but as of right now it's left me feeling somewhat dis-satisfied.
For the people who didn't enjoy this I can understand this somewhat, it does have some weak aspects but overall I enjoyed the film. It has a kind of classic, low budget sense about it. I liked the premise of this film, an amnesiac in a psychiatric institution is being terrorized by a ghost that is stalking and killing the other patients, it is definitely watchable from the start to end. But on a whole this film is well directed by Carpenter. Someone else mentioned the soundtrack which plays in the opening credits, it has a haunting child-like voice. it did have another song also Run Baby Run - The Newbeats. I have seen all of Carpenters films and this was pretty good, it has a more dignified sense about it than some of his others.
I felt it was very drawn out. Tiny little pieces were given along the way and it built to a huge, twist finish. The characters were believable and there left enough unclosed at the end to make your own decision, without any confusion - it ended without ending.
It is very riveting despite the drab surroundings, the acting does grip you, the baddies frustrate, the goodies you want to cuddle and there's one mysterious character. The doctor, it's impossible to determine which side he is on.
Very good film by a great man. Not a John Carpenter classic but worth a watch.
It is very riveting despite the drab surroundings, the acting does grip you, the baddies frustrate, the goodies you want to cuddle and there's one mysterious character. The doctor, it's impossible to determine which side he is on.
Very good film by a great man. Not a John Carpenter classic but worth a watch.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesOn the audio commentary, Jared Harris asks John Carpenter why he did not compose the soundtrack. John replies "Quite frankly, I'm just too old". Carpenter would go on to compose the music for the short film The Noise (2013), and eventually returned as composer for the Halloween (2018) reboot assisted by Cody Carpenter and Daniel A. Davies.
- GaffesThe story takes place in 1966, but the ambulance is a 1968 Cadillac.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Projector: John Carpenter's The Ward (2011)
- Bandes originalesRun Baby Run (Back Into My Arms)
Written by Don Grant and Joe Melson
Performed By The Newbeats
Courtesy of Hickory Records
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Ward?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Presas del diablo
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 10 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut mondial
- 5 343 820 $US
- Durée1 heure 29 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What is the Japanese language plot outline for The Ward : L'Hôpital de la terreur (2010)?
Répondre