Suit l'histoire d'une infirmière pieuse qui devient dangereusement obsédée par le sauvetage de l'âme de son patient mourant.Suit l'histoire d'une infirmière pieuse qui devient dangereusement obsédée par le sauvetage de l'âme de son patient mourant.Suit l'histoire d'une infirmière pieuse qui devient dangereusement obsédée par le sauvetage de l'âme de son patient mourant.
- Nominé pour le prix 2 BAFTA Awards
- 11 victoires et 33 nominations au total
Sona Vyas
- Agency Worker
- (as Sona Vyas Dunne)
Antony Barlow
- Passerby
- (uncredited)
- …
Avis en vedette
Because it's more than that. It's also a study of loneliness (of both main characters) and obsession. It does have its shock moments, not least when in becomes clear that Maud is not the clear-cut character you thought she was.
As I left the cinema, I quoted Dave Allen to myself: "I'm an atheist, thank God."
As I left the cinema, I quoted Dave Allen to myself: "I'm an atheist, thank God."
The elements of thrill and horror are negligible in this movie.
Does that mean it isn't good? Not quite, rather that the marketing campaign went terribly wrong and people are left feeling being mis-sold. I don't blame them.
All in all a better than average psychological drama that will leave undisturbed the most.
Word of advice for hardcore horror fans: cancel any expectation you might have of getting scared watching this because chances are you won't.
This is one of those movies where a couple of critics overdo their reviews and all the others feel they have to do the same or they will look dumb. So it gets overhyped. What happens here is a perfectly decent movie gets so hyped you are always going to be disappointed because it cannot possibly live up to that hyped reviewers drivel. Its a smart, clever movie that takes a while to get going, has a lot of padding and is not in any way a real horror film. It most certainly isnt "the scariest film of the decade" or whever that nonsense said. The lead is very good as is almost all the cast - pointless as some of them were. I liked the ending, thoiugh it was a little predictable. As an exploration of religious fervour in the wrong mind and the damage that can do, it certainly succeeds but if you are expecting the exorcist or anything like it, you will be disappointed. This is yet another example of critics trying to show how clever they are and at the same time, causing the movie to disappoint movie goers who, had they ignored those critics would probably have said, yeah, that was pretty good that - which is pretty much all it is. Scarborough is gorgeous as always though. if you've nebver been you should, quintessential English holiday spot.
....but almost worth the wait. But the one thing this isn't is a horror film, its a psychological thriller at best. Well worth a watch but I'd hardly call it a masterpiece.
There are essentially two ways to read 'Saint Maud (2019)', though its final half-second pretty much tells you exactly which reading is preferred - intended, even - by its writer/director, and it constantly keeps you flittering back and forth between these readings until its final few frames (literally). A film focusing on a deeply religious character is always going to be controversial, even if it doesn't depict her doing fanatical and dangerous things, but I don't think that the picture is condemning religion itself. In fact, I don't think it's 'about' religion at all. Instead, it's about loneliness. Maud is a deeply flawed protagonist, spiralling further and further into her own personal delusions as she exhibits increasingly harmful behaviour. However, it's typically easy to empathise with her, without condoning her actions. The movie starts off more or less as a straight drama, seeing our lead take on a new position as an at-home nurse for an ex-dancer with late-stage leukaemia. There are levels of enigmatic dread running through this segment of the film, mainly thanks to the director's willingness to slow things down and gnaw away at the audience, but things don't really slip into proper horror territory until around halfway through. Even then, the horror is mostly subtle. There are some elements of wince-inducing body-horror but most of the scary stuff is psychological. It becomes increasingly clear just how entrenched we are within Maud's perspective, as we begin to get glimpses of the way she sees the world, and it's never clear what's actually 'real'. This keeps you on your toes until the thing reaches its somewhat surprising yet simultaneously inevitable conclusion. For the most part, the affair walks the line between supernatural and psychological with poise. There are only a couple of moments in which it wobbles, with one sequence in particular feeling as though it crosses that line a little, but they aren't all that bothersome once you've cemented your final reading of the narrative (which, again, will either be confirmed or entirely upended by the last half-second). It's a really interesting, engaging and effective experience overall. It's also achingly well-made, with some phenomenal cinematography and brilliantly low-key performances. It's distinct, it's disturbing and it sticks with you. 8/10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesRose Glass originally wrote Maud with a more explicit backstory, but removed most of it in the final draft as she found it too similar to Carrie (1976), saying: "In early drafts, the character's backstory was quite different, she had this very extreme religious upbringing, went to Catholic school, all that stuff. But it just felt like a story I'd seen before, and it wasn't one I was particularly interested in retelling."
- Générique farfeluThe cockroach is credited as Nancy and is presumably named after Nancy Spungen. "Bug Wrangler," Grace Dickinson had another one called Sid.
- Bandes originalesCareless
Performed by Al Bowlly
Written by Lew Quadling, Dick Jurgens and Eddy Howard
Bourne Co. (ASCAP)
All Rights Administered by Warner Chappell Music Ltd
Licensed Courtesy of Warner Music UK
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Saint Maud?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 800 000 £ (estimation)
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 1 383 868 $ US
- Durée1 heure 24 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant