NOTE IMDb
5,3/10
19 k
MA NOTE
Une famille emménage dans une demeure en Géorgie, mais découvre rapidement qu'ils ne sont pas les seuls habitants de la maison. Bientôt, ils se retrouvent en présence d'un secret surgi des p... Tout lireUne famille emménage dans une demeure en Géorgie, mais découvre rapidement qu'ils ne sont pas les seuls habitants de la maison. Bientôt, ils se retrouvent en présence d'un secret surgi des profondeurs.Une famille emménage dans une demeure en Géorgie, mais découvre rapidement qu'ils ne sont pas les seuls habitants de la maison. Bientôt, ils se retrouvent en présence d'un secret surgi des profondeurs.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Lauren Pennington
- Nell
- (as Lauren Whitney Pennington)
Wayne Pére
- Station Master - 1858
- (as Wayne Pere)
C. Stuart Rome
- Hooded Attacker
- (as Stuart Rome)
Avis à la une
"Ghosts Of Georgia" follows a young family starting out in a new home with not a lot of money but plenty of land and love in a small town in Georgia. It is a place steeped in history as the family soon learns. As part of the Underground Railroad. Soon paranormal events begin to unfold as the family settles in with most of the activity centering around the gifts of the female members of the family. The story is sold as a sequel to the original film of the same title but is a completely stand along event with no correlation. It is one of the most famous haunting cases in the paranormal investigative world and also one my favorite creepy tales. "Ghosts Of Georgia" was the directorial debut of Tom Elkins who worked on several other movies about ghosts.The film stars Abigail Spencer, Chad Michael Murray, Katee Sackhoff and Emily Alyn Lind all of whom give a pretty standard performance except for Emily who played Heidi. Her performance was far exceeding of the standard capabilities and almost showed the young actress to possess talent like such actresses' as Chloe Moretz or Dakota Fanning.
I wasn't expecting much going into this film mostly due to the ridiculous title of the picture but I actually enjoyed the film. There was the basic elements here to be far more scarier but where held back by standard effects tricks that now plague paranormal movies almost to the point of making them boring. Yet at moments I felt actual suspense and eerie tension as more dramatic scenes unfolded into real chilling events. The setting and story was creepy and the film version held a far more haunting presence than what I originally imagined from the actual story. The film veered from the true paranormal case with a more morbid, dark representation of the evil spirit haunting the land as well as the family. The action sequences were produced well creating a relief from the mediocre dramatic moments that tended to case me to drift off. I found "Ghosts Of Georgia" to be a far better ghost flick it's predecessor and think the film could have gained a better reception from audiences had they not gone with the title. This film had a great set up, acceptable acting, plus all the expected moments of creepy chilling paranormal activity. It isn't going to be a movie that really scares the hell out of anyone over the age of ten but it is a great movie about a haunting. The only downside was the very end after the amped up climax that felt way to hallmark-y, coming off completely cheesy and made for TV. I would tell people to see it and expect a better movie than "The Haunting In Connecticut" or "The Apparition" but don't expect the same amount of fright that you get with "The Amityville Horror" or even "Grave Encounters".
I wasn't expecting much going into this film mostly due to the ridiculous title of the picture but I actually enjoyed the film. There was the basic elements here to be far more scarier but where held back by standard effects tricks that now plague paranormal movies almost to the point of making them boring. Yet at moments I felt actual suspense and eerie tension as more dramatic scenes unfolded into real chilling events. The setting and story was creepy and the film version held a far more haunting presence than what I originally imagined from the actual story. The film veered from the true paranormal case with a more morbid, dark representation of the evil spirit haunting the land as well as the family. The action sequences were produced well creating a relief from the mediocre dramatic moments that tended to case me to drift off. I found "Ghosts Of Georgia" to be a far better ghost flick it's predecessor and think the film could have gained a better reception from audiences had they not gone with the title. This film had a great set up, acceptable acting, plus all the expected moments of creepy chilling paranormal activity. It isn't going to be a movie that really scares the hell out of anyone over the age of ten but it is a great movie about a haunting. The only downside was the very end after the amped up climax that felt way to hallmark-y, coming off completely cheesy and made for TV. I would tell people to see it and expect a better movie than "The Haunting In Connecticut" or "The Apparition" but don't expect the same amount of fright that you get with "The Amityville Horror" or even "Grave Encounters".
This movie has everything, amazing story, scary moments which anyone wants in Horror movie. It's comparable to Conjuring and Nun. It has more scary moments than both of them. Being a fan of Conjuring and Nun horror movies, whatever, I watched it won't satisfied my expectations as it's hard to find a decent horror movie with good storyline. Actually,all horror movies are same, the same haunted house story or a person being possessed. However, this story is so broad. It not only has several scary moments but also has some mysteries too. This is just wholesome, that's I really wanted in a horror movie. Perfection!!
Lately I've been simply picking random horror movies of my preferred subgenres and diving into them if the trailer indicates it's not some cheap amateurish garbage, just to see if I wind up finding any diamonds in the rough. A Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia seemed adequate. Though I must say it's pretty funny that there's a movie with a very specific location in its title and keeping said title when its 'sequel' takes place in a completely different location with no relation to the first movie, but I digress. I was expecting a somewhat entertaining albeit mediocre film, but I actually ended up pretty impressed with the overall plot and the handling of it.
I think the major thing that hurt this movie was the editing; the effects and camera cuts used for instances such as when the characters are viewing the past vs the present were the exact caliber you would expect from a mediocre made-for-tv movie. There were also some things in the plot that didn't end up having much significance or used to the extent they ought to have, but I'm not a stickler for such things in horror movies unless they are glaringly apparent and significantly undercut the story we are meant to suspend our disbelief for.
Giving this movie a 5 makes it seem that despite my lack of lengthy criticism of it I thought it was terrible, so I feel the need to explain how I view horror. I can acknowledge that many are not "good" the same way you might describe a good movie from another genre, mainly because what constitutes a good horror movie seems to have such a broader range of subjectivity. My policy for checking whether a horror movie is good/at least decent on this website is whether or not its average rating is a 6 or higher. Therefore, when I watch a horror movie I think was pretty good I give it a 6 and consider it an endorsement-horror movies that are praised for being exceptional get judged with more conventional standards (i.e. Babadook, Hereditary, etc). I ramble about my rationale here just to emphasize that I'm not giving this movie a 5 because I think it's really mediocre; it gets a 5 because it's okay for what it is.
I think the major thing that hurt this movie was the editing; the effects and camera cuts used for instances such as when the characters are viewing the past vs the present were the exact caliber you would expect from a mediocre made-for-tv movie. There were also some things in the plot that didn't end up having much significance or used to the extent they ought to have, but I'm not a stickler for such things in horror movies unless they are glaringly apparent and significantly undercut the story we are meant to suspend our disbelief for.
Giving this movie a 5 makes it seem that despite my lack of lengthy criticism of it I thought it was terrible, so I feel the need to explain how I view horror. I can acknowledge that many are not "good" the same way you might describe a good movie from another genre, mainly because what constitutes a good horror movie seems to have such a broader range of subjectivity. My policy for checking whether a horror movie is good/at least decent on this website is whether or not its average rating is a 6 or higher. Therefore, when I watch a horror movie I think was pretty good I give it a 6 and consider it an endorsement-horror movies that are praised for being exceptional get judged with more conventional standards (i.e. Babadook, Hereditary, etc). I ramble about my rationale here just to emphasize that I'm not giving this movie a 5 because I think it's really mediocre; it gets a 5 because it's okay for what it is.
Overall, THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA, does a good job delivering what it promises, despite the idiotic tie to its namesake movie. Folks, this film has literally nothing to do with the first film NOR Connecticut, even tangentially, and the transparent money grab in the title was all at once deceptive, obvious, and detrimental to the movie's image. So much so, I almost didn't watch it.
So why did I watch? The simple answer is Abigail Spencer, a truly fine actor I first encountered in her role on the excellent TV series RECTIFY. Spencer is spot on and was the driving force behind this movie. Her performance as a clairvoyant mom-in-denial from a family of clairvoyants is well executed -- not her best work I've seen, but just very good. Nevermind the script is a rife with clichés and could have offered so much more to work with had the writer been on his game. Spencer still digs in and elevates her character beyond what one would expect from both a weak script and the genre. I predict there are big things in the future for this skilled actor.
Not that the other actors gave poor performances. Katee Sackhoff, whose acting can be hit or miss (which may be a function of her choice of roles), delivered a good performance and especially rang true as Spencer's sister. There's an undeniable sibling vibe between the two, and this helps the movie.
Chad Michael Murray adds some fairly non-substantive beefcake to the mix. He didn't make any big mistakes, but it's hard to mess up showing off a polished physique and looking hot in jeans. Finally, toward the end, he hits the sweet spot in a dialog with Spencer that reveals he actually can act at more than just a surface level of non-wooden competence. It's an important scene, and he gamely rises to the occasion.
A juvenile Emily Alyn Lind and her chin deliver a performance better than anything I've seen in her young adult roles. She was god awful in the recent THE BABYSITTER: KILLER QUEEN, and this movie is a reminder that she can actually act if she could just get out of her own way.
I would be remiss not to mention the great Cicely Tyson, positively the most unnerving though benign character in the film. She accomplishes more in a few short minutes of screen time than most of actors can in an hour. She's a national treasure, brilliant and timeless, as always.
What hurts THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA most of all is the aforementioned weak script by David Coggeshall. It stays on track and doesn't lose focus, but it also somehow lacks excitement. It occasionally plods, but that's not the worst of it. It moves in a straight line, and mostly lacks the reversals and twists that create true suspense. Dialog is its main strength, and at its best, it reads as real and well though out. There's very little throwaway jawing. Oh that dialog were all a script needed to succeed. Coggeshall has an impressive list of credits -- maybe he just wasn't feeling it on this one.
More, director Tom Elkins, an apparently first-time director, seemed to play it a little bit safe. It appears he stayed in his lane rather than try to remediate. Overall, however, a good first film for a new director, which could have been great had his more experienced scriptwriter handed him something less in need of fixing.
Otherwise, the production values were good. The camera work is focused and clear, even in dark scenes; the color saturation is good; the lighting is atmospheric; and the sparse special effects, while not at all original (are we getting tired of the elastic ghoulie scream mouth yet), are clean and well done. It would have been cool if the filmmakers had followed the lead of, for example, the Hearse Driver in BURNT OFFERINGS, whose smile haunted me in the dark for years. Let the actors be scary. They can do it, and without the help of a computer!
The sound, too, was good: the dialog was crisp and clear, the sound effects were correct, the Foley artists exercised restraint, and the music provided atmosphere while not competing with more important elements of the film.
There are a lot of good things to say about THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA. I debated between a 6- and 7-star rating. Unfortunately, the good can't overcome the deficiencies in this movie's founding document.
Recommendation: Watch for good performances and good production values, while understanding the script overall is workmanlike at best, though not full of holes and sporting some pretty decent dialog.
So why did I watch? The simple answer is Abigail Spencer, a truly fine actor I first encountered in her role on the excellent TV series RECTIFY. Spencer is spot on and was the driving force behind this movie. Her performance as a clairvoyant mom-in-denial from a family of clairvoyants is well executed -- not her best work I've seen, but just very good. Nevermind the script is a rife with clichés and could have offered so much more to work with had the writer been on his game. Spencer still digs in and elevates her character beyond what one would expect from both a weak script and the genre. I predict there are big things in the future for this skilled actor.
Not that the other actors gave poor performances. Katee Sackhoff, whose acting can be hit or miss (which may be a function of her choice of roles), delivered a good performance and especially rang true as Spencer's sister. There's an undeniable sibling vibe between the two, and this helps the movie.
Chad Michael Murray adds some fairly non-substantive beefcake to the mix. He didn't make any big mistakes, but it's hard to mess up showing off a polished physique and looking hot in jeans. Finally, toward the end, he hits the sweet spot in a dialog with Spencer that reveals he actually can act at more than just a surface level of non-wooden competence. It's an important scene, and he gamely rises to the occasion.
A juvenile Emily Alyn Lind and her chin deliver a performance better than anything I've seen in her young adult roles. She was god awful in the recent THE BABYSITTER: KILLER QUEEN, and this movie is a reminder that she can actually act if she could just get out of her own way.
I would be remiss not to mention the great Cicely Tyson, positively the most unnerving though benign character in the film. She accomplishes more in a few short minutes of screen time than most of actors can in an hour. She's a national treasure, brilliant and timeless, as always.
What hurts THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA most of all is the aforementioned weak script by David Coggeshall. It stays on track and doesn't lose focus, but it also somehow lacks excitement. It occasionally plods, but that's not the worst of it. It moves in a straight line, and mostly lacks the reversals and twists that create true suspense. Dialog is its main strength, and at its best, it reads as real and well though out. There's very little throwaway jawing. Oh that dialog were all a script needed to succeed. Coggeshall has an impressive list of credits -- maybe he just wasn't feeling it on this one.
More, director Tom Elkins, an apparently first-time director, seemed to play it a little bit safe. It appears he stayed in his lane rather than try to remediate. Overall, however, a good first film for a new director, which could have been great had his more experienced scriptwriter handed him something less in need of fixing.
Otherwise, the production values were good. The camera work is focused and clear, even in dark scenes; the color saturation is good; the lighting is atmospheric; and the sparse special effects, while not at all original (are we getting tired of the elastic ghoulie scream mouth yet), are clean and well done. It would have been cool if the filmmakers had followed the lead of, for example, the Hearse Driver in BURNT OFFERINGS, whose smile haunted me in the dark for years. Let the actors be scary. They can do it, and without the help of a computer!
The sound, too, was good: the dialog was crisp and clear, the sound effects were correct, the Foley artists exercised restraint, and the music provided atmosphere while not competing with more important elements of the film.
There are a lot of good things to say about THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA. I debated between a 6- and 7-star rating. Unfortunately, the good can't overcome the deficiencies in this movie's founding document.
Recommendation: Watch for good performances and good production values, while understanding the script overall is workmanlike at best, though not full of holes and sporting some pretty decent dialog.
A young family moves into a historic home in Georgia, only to learn they are not the house's only inhabitants. When Andy Wyrick (Chad Michael Murray) moves his wife Lisa (Abigail Spencer) and daughter Heidi (Emily Alyn Lind) to a historic home in Georgia, they quickly discover they are not the house's only inhabitants . As the family suddenly finds at home emerging weird and bizarre ghosts .Joined by Lisa's free-spirited sister, Joyce (Katee Sackhoff) , the family soon comes face-to-face with a mystery born of a deranged desire . Soon they find themselves in the presence of a secret rising from underground and threatening to bring down anyone in its path . Now terror awaits while the little daughter communicates with the dead , returning to unleash horror on the innocent and unsuspecting family . They soon learn that their mysterious old house has a disturbing history : not only was the place where inconceivable acts occurred, and along the way a demonic messenger appears , providing a gateway for spiritual entities to crossover.... a haunting secret rising from underground and threatening to bring down anyone in its path.. The family soon comes face-to-face with a mystery born of a deranged desire ... a haunting secret rising from underground and threatening to bring down anyone in its path ! . Some things cannot be explained and they'll stop at nothing to get it ! .. What if the only explanation for what you saw was unbelievable? Fear the Demon that doesn't fear God !. Darkness lives inside. Pray for Her.
Based on a true story , it charts one family's encounter with a haunted house , but then things go wrong when the dark forces of the supernatural cropping up , as the family attempts to end the nightmarish curse and at whatever cost they try to free from the callous evil . Routine , typical horror movie about possession and haunted house with chills , thrills , plot twists and creepy events . This is the sequel to¨The Haunting in Connecticut¨ starred by Virginia Madsen ,Martin Donovan, Elias Koteas , Amanda Crew . Building on the terror of The Haunting in Connecticut , this tale traces a young family's nightmarish descent into a centuries-old Southern hell . Ordinary Exorcist movie style with usual ingredients as creepy appearances , possession , violent events , disgusting faces from the possessed people , grisly crimes and poltergeister phenomena . The plot is plain and simple, a family moves to a isolated mansion unware that inside there's a terrible and malicious curse, resulting in fateful consequences . Main and support cast are pretty well . As the mother finely interpreted by Abigail Spencer , the good father performed by Chad Michael Murray , Katee Sackhoff as the rebel sister , the brave little girl played by Emily Alyn Lind , the mysterious Mr. Gordy played Grant James , among others .
It displays a thrilling and suspenseful musical score by Michael Wandmacher . Likewise , appropriate and atmospheric, though very dark cinematography by cameraman Yaron Levi . The motion picture was professionally directed by Tom Elkins , though it has some flaws , shortfalls , and failures . This was his film debut , though he's a notorious editor who has edited various terror films, such as : Wrong Turn , Child's play , The Prodigy , Flatliners , Inferno , Annabelle , Haunt , The Apparition , The new daughter , Haunting in Connecticut , White noise 2. Rating : 6/10. Acceptable and passable horror movie.
Based on a true story , it charts one family's encounter with a haunted house , but then things go wrong when the dark forces of the supernatural cropping up , as the family attempts to end the nightmarish curse and at whatever cost they try to free from the callous evil . Routine , typical horror movie about possession and haunted house with chills , thrills , plot twists and creepy events . This is the sequel to¨The Haunting in Connecticut¨ starred by Virginia Madsen ,Martin Donovan, Elias Koteas , Amanda Crew . Building on the terror of The Haunting in Connecticut , this tale traces a young family's nightmarish descent into a centuries-old Southern hell . Ordinary Exorcist movie style with usual ingredients as creepy appearances , possession , violent events , disgusting faces from the possessed people , grisly crimes and poltergeister phenomena . The plot is plain and simple, a family moves to a isolated mansion unware that inside there's a terrible and malicious curse, resulting in fateful consequences . Main and support cast are pretty well . As the mother finely interpreted by Abigail Spencer , the good father performed by Chad Michael Murray , Katee Sackhoff as the rebel sister , the brave little girl played by Emily Alyn Lind , the mysterious Mr. Gordy played Grant James , among others .
It displays a thrilling and suspenseful musical score by Michael Wandmacher . Likewise , appropriate and atmospheric, though very dark cinematography by cameraman Yaron Levi . The motion picture was professionally directed by Tom Elkins , though it has some flaws , shortfalls , and failures . This was his film debut , though he's a notorious editor who has edited various terror films, such as : Wrong Turn , Child's play , The Prodigy , Flatliners , Inferno , Annabelle , Haunt , The Apparition , The new daughter , Haunting in Connecticut , White noise 2. Rating : 6/10. Acceptable and passable horror movie.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAccording to screenwriter David Coggeshall, this movie was never intended to be any kind of sequel to Le Dernier Rite (2009) and they only became "related" when Gold Circle, the studio behind both movies, decided they wanted to try and capitalize on the success of the first movie.
- GaffesAccording to the dates on the screen, the moon is full on three nights in July over a period of 20 days.
- Crédits fousAt the beginning of the credits, the names that appear are turning from white into bloody red.
- ConnexionsFollowed by The Haunting in New York
- Bandes originalesCountry Kind of Way
Performed by Amy Wallace and Kai Brown
Written by Kai Brown, Andrew Bush and Amy Wallace
Courtesy of Amy Wallace
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 9 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut mondial
- 5 127 434 $US
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant