Ouija: El origen del mal
Ouija: Origin of Evil
Ouija: Origin of Evil
Director:
Mike FlanaganCámara:
Michael FimognariMúsica:
The Newton BrothersReparto:
Elizabeth Reaser, Henry Thomas, Lulu Wilson, Doug Jones, Annalise Basso, Sam Anderson, Ele Keats, Alexis G. Zall, Kate Siegel, Halle Charlton, Parker Mack (más)Streaming (4)
Sinopsis(1)
Nunca fue sólo un juego. Ouija: El origen del mal es la precuela del inesperado éxito de 2014 que se colocó a la cabeza de la taquilla y vuelve a sumergir a los espectadores en la leyenda de la tabla mágica a través de otra aterradora historia. Los Ángeles, 1965. Una madre viuda y sus dos hijas añaden un nuevo truco a sus sesiones de espiritismo e involuntariamente abren su casa a un auténtico espíritu maligno. Cuando el despiadado y cruel espíritu se apodera de la hija más joven, la reducida familia deberá enfrentarse a terrores inimaginables para salvarla y devolver al maligno intruso al lugar al que pertenece. (Universal Pictures España)
(más)Videos (18)
Reseñas (4)
It was a strange decision to make a prequel film in which almost nothing happens that we didn't already know from the previous installment. However, this time Mike Flanagan got the oracle board, and so Ouija: Origin of Evil is better in every way than the previous one. It has interesting characters, there's suspense, it's just not that silly or boring, and it can safely afford to quote The Exorcist several times. If you haven't seen the first film at all, go straight to this one and you'll get a very, very good piece of horror.
()
Ouija: Origin of Evil isn't a great film, but when it comes to movies featuring the Ouija board as the main focus, it's indeed one of the best. Plot-wise, it's a bit too clichéd, and considering that this is an "origin" film, it's quite clear how it will likely end, so there is a need for an open ending. But it's not entirely bad, and there are quite unpleasant scenes in it. A light above-average horror, worth going to the movie theater for.
()
Overall, a pleasant mainstream retro-horror film that, unlike the first part, doesn’t give many reasons to complain. On the other hand, it’s far from being a reason to celebrate. It felt a little like an uneven sequence of scenes and ideas that Flanagan couldn’t fit into Oculus. By that I mean that, though the individual scary scenes are more or less effective, I didn’t get the impression of a smooth experience. It is as if some of the scenes were not fully connected, as if there was too little or too much of something in some places. And I also felt that the staging of some of the scenes was somewhat rigid. The characters stand rigidly, then one of them moves somehow and says something; it feels weird and unnatural, I don’t know. With three films out of his forge, this should have been Flaganan’s year, but, once again, satisfaction is only relative. And someone should tell Mik that he’s trying too hard with those long faces and white eyes, they are not that creepy…
()
Yet another of the many ghost movies I wasn't excited to watch, as they don't really work in most cases. Surprisingly, I wasn't dissatisfied this time, although it was no masterpiece. The plot was predictable, of course, as these films usually follow a standard formula. It was neither boring nor annoying, so 3*+.
()
Anuncio