ÉVALUATION IMDb
4,6/10
2,4 k
MA NOTE
Trois cinéastes américains deviennent les cibles de l'esprit maléfique du cannibale le plus violent de l'histoire.Trois cinéastes américains deviennent les cibles de l'esprit maléfique du cannibale le plus violent de l'histoire.Trois cinéastes américains deviennent les cibles de l'esprit maléfique du cannibale le plus violent de l'histoire.
- Prix
- 1 victoire au total
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesEmma Smetana auditioned the part of Katarina, eventually played by Alina Golovlyova.
- ConnexionsFeatured in 23. Ceský lev (2016)
Commentaire en vedette
Ah, found footage. A niche genre that at its best can be exceptional, and that at its worst might be more unwatchable than even the worst of conventional film-making styles. Given the conceit of three amateur filmmakers making their own documentary, there is at least standard plausibility for the camera constantly rolling as it does. Given that conceit, too, it's arguable that 'Ghoul' is a tad on the exploitative side of cinema as the picture begins with denoting a terrible real history of orchestrated famine, and accounts of cannibalism, as the basis of its narrative. From there one might reasonably say that the proceedings become fairly routine for this type of picture; that Czech filmmaker Petr Jákl and his cast and crew were able to shoot on location in the Ukraine enters in the equation mostly only as a matter of flavoring for this specific tale. Maybe it speaks to my expectations more than anything else, but I was also a bit surprised that the course of events is limited to a single primary location, and a nondescript one at that; for some reason I assumed something a little more dynamic. In any event, none of this is an inherent mark against this feature, and while how much one enjoys 'Ghoul' will mostly depend on how much one likes found footage in the first place, I think this is at least moderately entertaining.
True, there's perhaps nothing here that we haven't seen before, and for lack of any especial spark, this will struggle to stand out in a crowd or rise above a basic level of horror fun. For what it's worth, though - while overall "average," I'd say this is about as well made as most any such title. On the one hand, I like small touches like Inna's witchcraft, and nuanced inclusion of folklore about consuming (human) flesh. I think the cast is swell, effects and special makeup look good (including blood and gore), and there are some smart ideas scattered throughout, including the more subtle instances of sound effects or visuals. At its best, in some measure 'Ghoul' successfully crafts some fine atmosphere, and some chilling moments. On the other hand, especially as the length progresses, the movie does fall into some of the common traps of found footage specifically and horror generally, and is prey to the same criticisms. Unsteady camerawork, long darkness, and bursts of loud audio mean that even some scenes that are otherwise worthy are beleaguered by a sense of being arbitrary and far-fetched. That's to say nothing of other scenes that as they present are too blunt or tactless at the outset, just flailing and/or "too much," and the climax and ending are rather overfull.
If my words seem blasé or noncommittal, take that as a reflection of the feature itself. It's not bad, and I can safely I say I do like it - it's also nothing special, either. There are no major, glaring flaws; nor are there any major, luminous strengths. How much you like or dislike this will correspond exactly to how you generally feel about found footage at large. It's duly enjoyable if you come across it; there's also no reason to go out of your way for it. When all is said and done I had a fairly good time watching 'Ghoul,' and maybe that's all it needs to be.
True, there's perhaps nothing here that we haven't seen before, and for lack of any especial spark, this will struggle to stand out in a crowd or rise above a basic level of horror fun. For what it's worth, though - while overall "average," I'd say this is about as well made as most any such title. On the one hand, I like small touches like Inna's witchcraft, and nuanced inclusion of folklore about consuming (human) flesh. I think the cast is swell, effects and special makeup look good (including blood and gore), and there are some smart ideas scattered throughout, including the more subtle instances of sound effects or visuals. At its best, in some measure 'Ghoul' successfully crafts some fine atmosphere, and some chilling moments. On the other hand, especially as the length progresses, the movie does fall into some of the common traps of found footage specifically and horror generally, and is prey to the same criticisms. Unsteady camerawork, long darkness, and bursts of loud audio mean that even some scenes that are otherwise worthy are beleaguered by a sense of being arbitrary and far-fetched. That's to say nothing of other scenes that as they present are too blunt or tactless at the outset, just flailing and/or "too much," and the climax and ending are rather overfull.
If my words seem blasé or noncommittal, take that as a reflection of the feature itself. It's not bad, and I can safely I say I do like it - it's also nothing special, either. There are no major, glaring flaws; nor are there any major, luminous strengths. How much you like or dislike this will correspond exactly to how you generally feel about found footage at large. It's duly enjoyable if you come across it; there's also no reason to go out of your way for it. When all is said and done I had a fairly good time watching 'Ghoul,' and maybe that's all it needs to be.
- I_Ailurophile
- 24 oct. 2022
- Lien permanent
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Ghoul?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 1 200 097 $ US
- Durée1 heure 26 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant