Una madre viuda y sus hijas incorporan un nuevo truco para reforzar su negocio de estafas de espiritismo al invitar a una presencia maligna a su hogar, sin darse cuenta de lo peligroso que e... Leer todoUna madre viuda y sus hijas incorporan un nuevo truco para reforzar su negocio de estafas de espiritismo al invitar a una presencia maligna a su hogar, sin darse cuenta de lo peligroso que es.Una madre viuda y sus hijas incorporan un nuevo truco para reforzar su negocio de estafas de espiritismo al invitar a una presencia maligna a su hogar, sin darse cuenta de lo peligroso que es.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 2 premios ganados y 7 nominaciones en total
Opiniones destacadas
Surprise! This is actually good. It is well-made. The characters are well-drawn and well-acted. I wouldn't say that this is breaking down any new walls but there is good in doing good work. I do have a couple of small nitpicks. For some reason, Alice and Father Tom go out for what looks like a fancy dinner. It almost looks like a date if it weren't for the characters. Second, I would keep the possibility that Doris is scamming everyone until further into the movie. It would be nice to have Father Tom uncover the whole situation as a reveal. The good are the actors, the mood, the simple premise, and good construction. It's a shocker that this is all pretty good.
This is a film that shouldn't exist, should never have gotten theatrical distribution and definitely shouldn't have attracted the likes of Flanagan (okay, he probably did this to increase his clout in the industry, but still). He musters some great work here, following familiar supernatural clichés but bringing his own touch to the proceedings.
The setting is beautiful, the characters likable and not completely square. The atmosphere is given time to build, he luxuriates in teasing and messing with audience expectations (as a way of spiting this, and goosing the audience lulled into a slow burn placation, he includes an explosive scene wherein the actual demon is seen shoving his fist down the little girl's throat. It's both too much and a necessary jolt at the time, a conundrum if ever there was one and a small encapsulation of everything right and wrong within this film).
It's too bad some of the nice work done in the first 2/3rds of the film is undone by a clichéd, boring, exorcism-lite finale. None of it is very scary, and it all has the feel of fitting into the "Ouija" franchise package, whatever in God's name that could mean. Considering the stakes here, what Flanagan does is still impressive.
Alice and her two daughters run a scam business in which they "speak to the dead". The mother justifies this business by telling her youngest daughter, Doris, that it helps people move on and get closure. When her eldest, Lina, plays the new Ouija boardgames at a friends house, she tells her mother to incorporate it into her act. She does and things take a sinister turn when they scam becomes reality.
It's hard to make a game board scary. The first film tried, failed and this one tries and succeeds for the most part. Any non-horror fan might balk at the idea that this film is good, but I consider this movie to be one of the most underrated flicks of the year. Flanagan knows how to build solid tension and he doesn't rely on cheap scares or an obscene amount of gore. This film has none of that. Careful framework and lighting is all he needs to create an unsettling atmosphere. Whenever someone decides to look through the ouija glass piece, you feel yourself tense up expecting something to happen.
Kids in horror films are the go to for anything scary. Most movies tend to cast children horribly and they end of ruining the film. Doris, played by Lulu Wilson delivers an innocent and somewhat chilling performance as the youngest daughter. Her goodbye message to a young boy about what it feels like to be strangled to death is an excellent scene to send chills down your spine. No scary images, sounds or blood needed. Just a child delivering one monologue about suffocating you.
Obviously the film is far from perfect, but it doesn't cater to the happy ending crowd either. It takes some chances and for the most part, lands them. I was surprised by how much I liked this film, which may be why the rating is higher than what others would tend to give a film like this. Had the first film never existed, this would be a bigger hit.
At the end of the final act, I was thinking "high-fives all-around, good job guys" and was about to give this two thumbs up.
And then, inexplicably, in the last 5 minutes the filmmakers revert to cheesy B-horror cliches making for a jarring denoument that simply feels wrong.
WTF? Was that studio exec interference or just plain bad judgement? Nope. Because it's a prequel (to a movie I haven't seen yet), I guess it had to end with a bridge to the other movie. But it could have and should have been better, so the truth is, it's just bad writing. The last few minutes just don't match the tone or narrative arc of the first hour and a half, and it comes across feeling like a cheap add-on. Not a twist ("cool!"), or a surprise ("gotcha!") just lame ("seriously? Pffthtttt!") (That's the raspberry sound, BTW.)
This movie should have wrapped up nicely at 1:27:25. If it had: 8/10.
With the dopey last 4 and a half minutes added: 6/10.
PS - If you can, stop watching at 1:27:25 and just imagine a better CODA; e.g., Lana, the sensible one, getting on with her life as best she can, and the Ouija board washing up on some beach like in Jumanji.
In the 1960's, widow Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) works as a fortune teller out of her home, staging false séances with the help of her teenage daughter Paulina (Annalise Basso) and younger child Doris. (Lulu Wilson) After purchasing a Ouija board as a new gimmick for her work, Alice does not notice that Doris has become overtaken by a deranged and mysterious force associated with the board, instead believing that her young daughter's newfound abilities and knowledge of things she could not possibly know are signs that unlike her, Doris is a real medium. However, as Doris' abilities become gradually all the more powerful and sinister, Alice and Paulina must band together to try and break her free from the devious spirits of the past that have taken ahold of her physical form...
Flanagan directs from a script co-written by Jeff Howard, and much like his wonderful previous efforts "Oculus" and "Hush", here he continues to shine as one of the finest new voices in horror. There's a certain sense of taste and thoughtfulness he injects into his work, as he takes his time to try and establish strong character and interpersonal relationships, in addition to identifiable human drama which helps to accentuate the fear that builds. He also just knows how to deliver a darned good scare- a skill he uses expertly throughout the entire runtime here to build a great sense of foreboding dread.
The performances are all stellar as well, helping to add to the film's high quality and impact. Elizabeth Reaser is fantastic as the mother Alice, and you really get a feel for a person lost after the death of their beloved spouse who is trying to hold it together for the sake of her children. Wilson is a great new Doris and does remarkably well for an actress of such a young age. Supporting roles by the likes of Henry Thomas are all uniformly strong and help to round out the cast in likable performances. And Annalise Basso steals the show as Paulina (also known as "Lina"), who becomes our main focus and is a strong presence on-screen. At only 17 years old, Basso is definitely one to keep an eye on in the future. She possesses talent far beyond her years, and is the beating heart of the film as a sister and daughter struggling to help her sibling and mother from the forces at play- both supernatural and emotional.
The film does falter at times a bit, which is where it loses points. Despite the first film being decidedly very poor by comparison, this film does a bit of distracting ret-con work that may bother those who are familiar with the original. Some major details of the backstory and rules are changed, which made it feel a bit inorganic as a continuation. It's also a bit too heavy on the scares up- front, which lessened their impact. I would have preferred more slow a buildup. And it does lack some drama since this is a prequel and you'll be able to guess some of what happens based on this fact.
Still, that cannot stop this from being a darned good and very well- assembled supernatural horror. It's not one of the best horror films ever made by any means, but it's a solid and highly entertaining thriller boasting some heart, some good scares and a great cast. This is the movie you've been waiting for if you've wanted to see a movie based around the idea of the dreaded Ouija board. My advice? Skip out on the first film and just watch this as a stand-alone. It's far more rewarding an experience than the awful original could ever hope to be.
I give "Ouija: Origin of Evil" a strong 8 out of 10. If you're open minded, be sure to give it a shot, especially if the last one let you down. Take it from me... this is a very pleasant surprise.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe film was shot digitally, but director and editor Mike Flanagan, in order to add a retro feel to the film, added elements in post-production to give the appearance of a movie shot on film. Those include the 'cigarette burns', marks that appear every 20 minutes or so in the upper right corner of the frame, which were used to signal a change of reels for film projected.
- ErroresIn order to make the film appear more authentic for the time in which it is set (1967), cue marks, or "reel change" marks, are inserted at approximately every 20 minutes. However, the marks are oval when they should actually be circular, since this is a film presented in a 1.85:1 aspect ratio and not in a 2.39:1 aspect ratio. The only time the marks should be oval is if a film is projected with an anamorphic lens. On an anamorphic film print, the cue marks are circular, but the anamorphic lens makes the circle look like an oval when projected on a screen.
- Citas
Doris Zander: Wanna hear something cool?
Mikey: Sure.
Doris Zander: Do you know what it feels like to be strangled to death? First, you feel the pressure in your throat. Your eyes water, and you start to taste something very, very sour in your mouth. Then it's like someone lights a match right in the middle of your chest, and that fire grows. It fills your lungs, and your throat, and all the way behind your eyes. And finally, that fire turns to ice; like pins and needles of ice are sticking into your fingers, your toes, your arms. You see stars, then darkness. And the last thing you feel... is cold.
[Mikey looks confused and horrified]
Doris Zander: [smiles] Goodnight, Romeo.
- Créditos curiososThere is a post-credits scene with Lin Shaye.
- Bandas sonorasYou Gotta Move Me
Written by Dennis Michael Lacey
Performed by Mike Lacey
Courtesy of Crucial Music Corporation
Selecciones populares
- How long is Ouija: Origin of Evil?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Ouija 2: el origen del mal
- Locaciones de filmación
- Clark Residences - 306 Loma Drive, Los Ángeles, California, Estados Unidos(the girl's school)
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 9,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 35,144,505
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 14,065,500
- 23 oct 2016
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 81,705,746
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 39 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1