IMDb RATING
5.0/10
5.1K
YOUR RATING
Anna is a servant who accepts a post at the St. Ange. She arrives to confront an unsettling lack of orphans, save for one. Then the bizarre sights and sounds begin, which seem to elude detec... Read allAnna is a servant who accepts a post at the St. Ange. She arrives to confront an unsettling lack of orphans, save for one. Then the bizarre sights and sounds begin, which seem to elude detection by the other servant or the gloomy director.Anna is a servant who accepts a post at the St. Ange. She arrives to confront an unsettling lack of orphans, save for one. Then the bizarre sights and sounds begin, which seem to elude detection by the other servant or the gloomy director.
Christophe Lemaire
- Un homme des services sociaux
- (uncredited)
Louis Thevenon
- Un déménageur
- (uncredited)
Franck Vestiel
- Man in Black
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I don't usually watch horror movies, but this one had such a good look to it that I thought it might turn out to be a "thinking person's" movie like THE HAUNTING or THE UNINVITED. As it went along, I started thinking more of TURN OF THE SCREW, because there were implications that the visions Anna was having were due to her unexplained previous abuse and her mysterious pregnancy...and she was making others believe in the visions (like the nanny in TURN OF THE SCREW). But how does that account for the boy's death at the beginning? The last third of the movie is a complete letdown because of the introduction of fantasy elements beyond the limits of the movie up to that point. (The elevator is the first clue that we're going off track.) I can't believe how many IMDb posters actually seem to believe that the subterranean scenes are somehow "real." There is no evidence that anything sinister was ever done to the children who came to Saint-Ange during WWII. There are SO many interesting ways this movie could have played out...too bad they chose a dud ending. However, I have to say that Joseph LoDuca (Xena) did a marvelous score, which has to sustain a huge amount of silent action. This is definitely a movie to watch with a fast forward button.
I cant believe some of the comments i've read on here about this film! It was very slow paced and wasn't very scary or disturbing, but the cinematography was beautiful, as were the sets and the music, although the music didn't go with some scenes and took away the films eerie atmosphere. If you enjoy supernatural films such as "The others" then this may not be as good but is still worth watching because it is slow and creepy and it does build up to some spooky scenes. The acting was OK, nothing special, but watchable. I would give this film a chance, i found other peoples bad comments very misleading, they may not have enjoyed the film, but, although not brilliant, is not as bad as they make it out to be.
I understand why some people decided to give this movie a low rating, but I do not believe this movie deserves a low rating. If you were looking for a "horror" film in the slasher, in-your-face, gory, bloody sense, then I can see how you were disappointed. But if that is your only definition of a scary movie, I don't think you should be reviewing movies. This movie had many good qualities, and I believe many people could enjoy it if they gave it a chance. Foreign horror movies have a very different approach, and if you can get on board with that, I think you will like this. If Saw IV is your idea of quality horror, don't bother.
First off, this is supposed to come out as a treat for fans of Fulci's The Beyond (it even features the return of its star Catriona MacColl) and his other gloomy films. So it's got nice locations (romanian studios), pretty minimal as the whole movie takes place in a great mansion supposed to be a WWII orphanage, its narrowing woods and cellars. Cast is pretty top notch with kinky Virginie Ledoyen (L'Eau Froide, La Cérémonie, La fille seule - her only good movies in my opinion - The Beach) and wacko Lou Doillon (Jane Birkin's daughter - one of the most irritating actress to come out of french cinema lately, but physically disturbing and therefore probably appropriate for this movie!).
Beautiful photography, gloomy atmosphere, weird and nasty children (kinda reminiscent of the evil ones in Cronenberg's The Brood, but not really either), derelict locations, potential scream queens, this movie shows good production values but sadly remains pretty lazy storywise. I won't describe the story too much, but after a pretty classy/classic (easy) hour of ghost induced story, the movie goes wacko and tries to become a bit disturbing. Unfortunately, even if the scenery and filming shows you some very weird and dare I say effective clinical & morbid images (the only part giving the movie a little of its own personality), those images bears no real depth and fall flat in utter stupidity! So even though I admire the plastic quality of the last half hour, I remain highly skeptical in its capacity to convey an interesting story falling back on its feet without relying on weirdness because the lazy writer(s?) have no real vision of the story as a whole. Also, the twist revelation about the cats killer's identity is really lame. Sadly, another example of France incapacity to produce thoughtful and provocative fantasy...
Think a mixture of Furie's "The Entity", Robert Wise's "The Haunting" with Fulci's "The Beyond" and Chris Cunningham's clinical imagery.
Just one's opinion.
4/10
Beautiful photography, gloomy atmosphere, weird and nasty children (kinda reminiscent of the evil ones in Cronenberg's The Brood, but not really either), derelict locations, potential scream queens, this movie shows good production values but sadly remains pretty lazy storywise. I won't describe the story too much, but after a pretty classy/classic (easy) hour of ghost induced story, the movie goes wacko and tries to become a bit disturbing. Unfortunately, even if the scenery and filming shows you some very weird and dare I say effective clinical & morbid images (the only part giving the movie a little of its own personality), those images bears no real depth and fall flat in utter stupidity! So even though I admire the plastic quality of the last half hour, I remain highly skeptical in its capacity to convey an interesting story falling back on its feet without relying on weirdness because the lazy writer(s?) have no real vision of the story as a whole. Also, the twist revelation about the cats killer's identity is really lame. Sadly, another example of France incapacity to produce thoughtful and provocative fantasy...
Think a mixture of Furie's "The Entity", Robert Wise's "The Haunting" with Fulci's "The Beyond" and Chris Cunningham's clinical imagery.
Just one's opinion.
4/10
"House of Voices," the first feature film by Pascal Laugier, contains many of the elements that made his 2008 cult-classic "Martyrs" so great. Both films start off in a predictable, genre-specific way -- then gradually reveal darker, stranger, subterranean layers that defy our expectations. Of the two films, "House" is lighter fare, while "Martyrs" is far bloodier and much, much more disturbing.
"House of Voices," begins as a slow-build Gothic ghost-story, in the vein of 2007's "The Orphanage" or 2001's "The Others." "House" works quite well on this level, featuring engaging female performances, a slowly-unravelling mystery, some handsome cinematography, a lush dramatic score, and some moments of genuine dread. But then, in its final act, the film takes a sharp and surprising turn toward the surreal. I could describe what happens in these scenes, but what really makes them work is the way they're filmed -- the simple strange visual power of these moments. Suffice to say, while you might have a general idea where the plot of this movie is headed, you will probably not foresee exactly how it arrives there.
The final scenes of this movie plumb some nightmarish depths, departing stylistically from the subtle Gothic-horror which came before, and entering far stranger territory. Don't worry; it all adds up. This isn't one of those horror films which leads you on, only to end with such strangeness that you have no hope of understanding what the movie was about. No, everything here makes sense in terms of the film's plot. It's just that the film's sudden stylistic change is jarring and surreal, evoking the kinds of unexpected shifts we might experience in our deepest nightmares.
For me, this movie worked quite well. I see some others here have given it bad reviews. I gather that's because they don't know how to tell a thoughtful, well-made film from worthless pap like the "Saw" franchise. This certainly isn't the best movie I've ever seen, but it's a very fine, thoughtful, moderately scary film with a bizarre final act that might haunt you afterward.
If you like this film, and you have a strong stomach, I'd certainly recommend Laugier's "Martyrs." It plays the same stylistic tricks as this film, but much more intensely, and to greater effect. Word of warning, though: It is a far more disturbing film than "House of Voices."
"House of Voices," begins as a slow-build Gothic ghost-story, in the vein of 2007's "The Orphanage" or 2001's "The Others." "House" works quite well on this level, featuring engaging female performances, a slowly-unravelling mystery, some handsome cinematography, a lush dramatic score, and some moments of genuine dread. But then, in its final act, the film takes a sharp and surprising turn toward the surreal. I could describe what happens in these scenes, but what really makes them work is the way they're filmed -- the simple strange visual power of these moments. Suffice to say, while you might have a general idea where the plot of this movie is headed, you will probably not foresee exactly how it arrives there.
The final scenes of this movie plumb some nightmarish depths, departing stylistically from the subtle Gothic-horror which came before, and entering far stranger territory. Don't worry; it all adds up. This isn't one of those horror films which leads you on, only to end with such strangeness that you have no hope of understanding what the movie was about. No, everything here makes sense in terms of the film's plot. It's just that the film's sudden stylistic change is jarring and surreal, evoking the kinds of unexpected shifts we might experience in our deepest nightmares.
For me, this movie worked quite well. I see some others here have given it bad reviews. I gather that's because they don't know how to tell a thoughtful, well-made film from worthless pap like the "Saw" franchise. This certainly isn't the best movie I've ever seen, but it's a very fine, thoughtful, moderately scary film with a bizarre final act that might haunt you afterward.
If you like this film, and you have a strong stomach, I'd certainly recommend Laugier's "Martyrs." It plays the same stylistic tricks as this film, but much more intensely, and to greater effect. Word of warning, though: It is a far more disturbing film than "House of Voices."
Did you know
- TriviaShot back to back in two versions, one in French and the other in English.
- Goofs(at around 15 mins) The movie is supposed to take place in 1958, as the opening scenes state. When the children leave the house in the beginning of the movie, one of the cars accompanying the buses full of children is clearly a white Peugeot 404. Peugeot introduced this model in 1960, and made it available to the public a year later.
- ConnectionsReferenced in Viande d'origine française (2009)
- SoundtracksI'm in the Mood for Love
Performed by Vera Lynn, Charlie Kunz and the Casani Club Orchestra
Music by Jimmy McHugh
Lyrics by Dorothy Fields
© Famous Music corp. C/o BMG Music Publishing France with BMG Music Vision approval
(P)1983 Decca Records Company ltd with the kind participation of Universal Music Projets Speciaux
Details
Box office
- Budget
- €5,320,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $6,782,283
- Runtime
- 1h 38m(98 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content