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
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.
Nicely shot, if slightly claustrophobic, thriller set in the 60's, that was better than I expected.
After a young woman is found setting fire to an abandoned house she is taken to the local asylum. There she meets 5 other young women, all patients because of various mental 'illnesses'.
What follows is a ghost story which, at times, had me quite spooked.It seems that the girls have upset someone who is unwilling to forgive them. Various escape attempts, therapy sessions and red herrings follow. OK, it's no classic, but it had a genuinely interesting story that kept me hooked until the end.
Well worth a watch
After a young woman is found setting fire to an abandoned house she is taken to the local asylum. There she meets 5 other young women, all patients because of various mental 'illnesses'.
What follows is a ghost story which, at times, had me quite spooked.It seems that the girls have upset someone who is unwilling to forgive them. Various escape attempts, therapy sessions and red herrings follow. OK, it's no classic, but it had a genuinely interesting story that kept me hooked until the end.
Well worth a watch
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.
Returning to the director's chair after a ten year absence, you might think that during all that time, director John Carpenter would have gone through a lot of proposed projects and picked the best one of all for a comeback. I have absolutely no idea why Carpenter picked "The Ward" for his comeback. It isn't a terrible movie - for a somewhat low budget movie, it looks fairly professional, and it isn't boring at any moment. But throughout the movie, I kept telling myself, "You've seen this all before." This includes the "surprise" twist towards the end the movie - most likely you'll have some idea of what will be revealed before it actually happens. And when you think about the twist after the movie has ended, you will realize that some other parts of the movie don't make much sense with the knowledge of this twist. The confusing twist, along with the unsurprising makeup of the rest of the movie probably explain why this movie didn't get a theatrical release in North America.
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.
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