5150, rue des Ormes

As a big fan of horror movies I try to see everything that is released. When I read the "5150 Rue des Ormes" plot I thought it was going to be a good "different" horror movie but now I have to say I'm a bit disappointed. I can picture the whole movie as a short story rather than a movie, some stories are not movie material, this one is a big example. Just because you have a creepy thriller it doesn't mean you can dress it with actors. The whole background story is good, the acting is good, the characters are interesting but all together in this movie are messy. There are many story lines that lead no-where, there were symbolisms bad used and many clichés. I wasn't scared about the story, it's a bad nightmare. Bad script, bad direction, good intention.

It reminded me of the films of Alfred Hitchcock for some reason-maybe Psycho more than his other films. Maybe a bit strong in places but it is a well done movie that makes the statement that people are often not as ready to deal with a serious situation as they might think they are, which defines the predicament a character in this film faces. Disturbingly possible is maybe another point the film tries to make, and in that sense I think maybe, but not in most places in Quebec. The sub titles didn't always convey the right meaning of the french dialogue but maybe that was just me, but I thought they worked well enough to follow the story and see the characters. True 'nouveau cinema noir', for people who like horror movies, even though it is billed as a drama.

Canada - Film student gets into a little accident on his bicycle avoiding a black cat. He goes to a nearby home to ask for assistance. When the resident tells him to wait outside while he calls our man a cab HE DOESN'T. I can't stress this enough. He does not wait outside as requested. Instead he barges right into someone's home and privacy. On top of that when he hears someone upstairs, what does he do but invite himself further into the residence. Once he sees blood all over this guy upstairs it's all over for our hero. Now the guy who lives here and has perpetrated what all has happened herein has no choice but to keep our hero under wraps. The story is about the struggle between the two, and other characters, i.e., the mama of the house and the two daughters who live therein to thicken the plot. I waited and searched for this movie for EVER. I am happy to say it was well worth it. This is such an individual flick, similarities to Whatever Happened to Baby Jane and Frailty notwithstanding.

Patrick Sénécal is Quebec's Stephen King. His stories are so intricate and realistic they really make your brain work. It's a great psychological thriller. Let me point out what's great... 1. The acting is really good. I strongly congratulate Marc-André Grondin and Sonia Vachon. 2. Great character development. 3. Great adaptation. 4. Long but captivating. Never a dull moment. 5. Visually stunning. 6. Realistic dialogue and characters. So basically everything is awesome. The reason why i gave this only 9 stars is because the ending was....not disappointing but unfinished. I strongly suggest you get this movie, but beware of some gag-worthy moments.

Rising like Phoenix from the ashes, the Chess concept began to take over the plot as a plot twist from a claustrophobic drift in such a modest production; that was when the story created its greatest suspense which will never end. I consider the whole as a great and awe-inspiring achievement.

After fell off his bike a film student Yannick needs to stop by a two-story town house to ask for first aid. The father of the family from that house suggests him to make a call. After he goes inside and leaves the door unlocked behind him, Yannick starts his fatal discovery with his first step inside. Very suitable movie poster for this exact moment, when the happenings start to take effect.

First he witnesses the father of the family Jacques Beaulieu committing a murder in front of his eyes, second he's locked up in an unfurnished room, and then he starts having trouble with other family members. Right at this sequence, we see one of the finest achievements in the movie: Excellent-almost perfect- CHARACTERIZATION. What will come out of the blue is all the main characters in this film will have a terrifying destiny. When everything is running organized for Jacques Beaulieu's plans, Yannick turns the outcomes upside down. Like all the other viewers, me too became fond of the CHESSBOARD OF CORPSES. Jacques planned to array the chessmen from the characters he wanted to have, but Yannick's existence also altered the appearances on the chess board.

It's not just unpredictable what's going to happen every other scene, it's also unique in story-telling, too. Deeply detailed PSYCHOLOGICAL LAYOUT, the leading actors(Yannick vs. Jacques) reflect their inner phobias, counter-phobias and behaviour patterns against each other in a very factual way. What's very engaging is the balance of justice which forces us to understand that humankind is not entirely good or evil. The evil character Jacques is only trying to save the public from criminals and sinners, while he's fighting against the evil, he becomes an evil on his own, under a self-built heresy.

Very nicely done adaptation work offers a promising film and it succeeds in production aspects, too. Yannick's psychological trauma moments are served out with nice VISUAL EFFECTS and CINEMATOGRAPHY. It offers an unique style of tension without applying basic horror methods, spooky visuals and sharp shots which forces the viewer to wince.

A few deficiencies on character and story development with possible plot holes: 1/ JACQUES'S ACT OF JUSTICE: Jacques never locks up innocents into the Room Of Sinners. But he kills a sinner in front of Yannick's eyes just because he's there to get aid for his bruises. As a serial killer of the 24 bodies and a thief to steal another 24 corpses, he should've been more careful with Yannick. 2/ MAUDE'S SUICIDE: She never attempted to suicide before suddenly deciding on helping Yannick to escape. 3/ When Yannick started first to see delusions, he sees A FAT MAN WITH GLASSES, and continues seeing the same man every time he sees another delusion. There is no story held for this supporting character. 4/ The story doesn't build the necessary bridge between the happenings and the results for each family member's destiny. Neither the mum or dad ever worried about Michelle, after Anne is sent to the afflicted children's school. When the movie is over, everybody's life will be different. This isn't a suitable premise for a movie in this genre. 5/ Anne's school never made any investigation nor at least a questionnaire about Anne's past.

This film was examining the addiction to murder and the effects of violence in the family in one point. It came to a dead end, finished in a tragedy for everyone, which is idealistically appropriate with its examination. The second point supported the idea of the personal needs to trust the government's justice system to live in safety. Creating a justice other than the current system is only a fantasy. In this case, comparing with SCORSESE'S RAGING BULL, 5150 doesn't make the viewer to feel sad about Jacques the way we felt about Jake La Motta. Both Jacques and Jake seek their own sense of justice, but end up behind the bars. Another reference on Jake La Motta is occurred when Yannick chose to turn back to the Chess-game addiction instead of the choice of freedom, so his paranoia obsession on Chess took over his personal life; just like Jake La Motta happens to become a stage comedian but continue practising his punches and crochets in the backstage of the theater. Unfinished games may cause obsessions, but an unachieved purpose can kill. A Proudly Canadian film. Congrats.