Saint Ange

Plot synopsis:
One of the tensions of this film set in France, is between the film's present (1958) and the past (1946). This tension is introduced when Marie (Marie Herry) mentions the scary children. Soon thereafter a child dies at the orphanage; resulting in it being closed down, save for a single orphan. Alluded to early in the movie, things have gone terribly wrong in the past at the orphanage. The film leaves unresolved what happened in the past. This is because it was nothing unusual. An overworked, under resourced institution in the shadow of World War II that was inundated with 300 children, was unable to cope. Franchard poses the question, "How many do you think we could save?" This tension is not what drives the film; it provides context but not momentum.The introduction of the character Anna (Virginie Ledoyen) starts the build up of this tension. What she sees and hears at the orphanage drives her to look and pry. She is primed for this by a brief, single sentence exchange with Marie, the orphan who is leaving the grounds. Anna is reinforced in her prying by her exchanges with Judith (Lou Doillon) who also sees and hears things unaccountable by normal means, despite the daily drug routine enforced by Helenka (Dorina Lazar) the cook and only other staff member on the grounds full time. Helenka does not appear to hear or see anything out of the ordinary and discourages Anna in her prying as does Franchard (Catriona MacColl) the director of the orphanage. This discouragement is simply that - discouragement. Franchard and Helenka do not resort to subterfuge or violence to prevent Anna's nosing about. They see the past as a painful and sorrowful thing best left in the past. They show no sign of hiding anything criminal or otherwise odious. For them, leaving the past alone is about moving on and forgetting the misery that was unavoidable.Judith, Franchard, and Helenka, were all present at the orphanage in 1946. The latter two discourage Anna; the former encourages Anna and assists in her looking about. This sets up the basic tension of the film: Sanity v. Insanity. Both Franchard and Helenka are obviously well grounded people. No frivolity, barely a smile to be had between them marks their demeanor. Judith must take drugs, treats people irrationally and is the opposite of the stern Franchard and the stout Helenka. As Anna associates more with Judith she hears and sees more unusual things. In the end insanity wins the battle. This shows starkly when Anna descends from the dilapidated orphanage into a brightly lit, well appointed and immaculate hospital ward in her pursuit of the scary children. This setting is so out of place in a building that has closed wings because of the inability to maintain them that it clearly signals the true nature of the scary children: they are a product of the minds of those who see and hear them.There is little to explain Anna's descent into insanity. The only clues are she was badly beaten by a former employer, evidenced by the scars on her back and that she is pregnant. The father is not mentioned and although there is an insinuation she was impregnated by her former employer this in not made clear. That she does not want the baby is not really clear. She travels with a stethoscope and listens to the baby's heartbeat. That she is ashamed of being pregnant is clear. Upon discovering everyone at Saint Ange knows she is pregnant, and knew before she arrived, she punches herself in the stomach in an apparent but halfhearted attempt to abort the baby. Whatever her underlying mental state may have been when upon arrival at Saint Ange she clearly takes a turn while at Saint Ange. This is perhaps a nod to how weak our understanding of insanity is. There is little to say why she turns because there is so little understood about the insane.

Tags: insanity

Review:
It certainly didn't beat you over the head with plot points, and did feel like a key scene or two was left out of the final cut (setting up the kittens for example) but overall was a nice, spooky little film.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
There is no story, the plot is weak, and the ending is frustrating because the director Pascal Laugier has no idea what he is doing.The first five minutes are the best part of the movie, and everything else goes downhill quickly from there.
If you want to see a good horror movie with better acting and directing and plot, go see "Haute Tension" by Alexandre Aja. He's a talented French director who knows what he is doing.Pascal Laugier should go back to directing making-of videos for Christophe Gans.
We care of course but we are more honest about our feelings.When this movie ended, I had to go home and watch some real movies in my DVD collection just to cleanse myself of the disaster that is called "Saint Ange" and also it seemed much much longer than it's running time.
it's NECESSARY in order to accomplish the movie's goal, some of you need to understand that inside the genre of horror it doesn't always take a blood bath or a faceless and brainless killer who strangely teleports all around cutting everyone's head off and has more lives than a cat to actually be scared, that formula just DOESN'T work anymore with some of us.Before you watch a movie, you have to know what's coming, I mean, if you're going to watch like a Fantasy film, you cannot therefore be like..
and that goes right from the start to the very ending on this movie.So, to sum up I gave this film a 10 because it's extremely under rated and it needs to go up a little, I wouldn't say it's a master piece either, but it would pretty much deserve at least a 7.Another movies you could like if this one was OK to you?
The Orphanage (2007) obviously took a few cues from here.I'm only writing this review to save people time.If you enjoy Pascal Laugier/Guillermo del Toro type movies then you have every reason to check this one out.Wikipedia also says something I find very interesting about Laugier.
Because we have directors who think they can make movies and try to copy American films but they fail miserably, just like Pascal Laugier with Saint-Ange.If you are going to reference Italian horror directors that is OK, as long as you have a story.
She should return to Jacquot and Assayas, who are two intelligent French directors who KNOW how to make GOOD movies with REAL stories.This impostor Pascal Laugier is just a former security guard who was an assistant to director and producer Christophe Gans (Le Pacte de loups) and did him favors which is how he got this job in the first place.
Next time, save some money and let your grandmother direct the movie, because she would probably do a better job than the idiot you hired for Saint-Ange.But there is still hope for French cinema.
I have not yet seen the films of Alexandre Aja but all my friends tell me that he is one million times better than this Laugier, and so is another French director Florent Emilio Siri who is talented and rising.I am not surprised that this movie has not yet been released anywhere else outside Europe.
Use your money to rent another good movie, like The Others or anything really, because any movie is better than Saint-Ange!
The result is something that resembles "Saint Ange" which is indeed so dreadful that it makes me feel shame and embarrassment for Ms. Ledoyen, Ms. Doillon and the other actors in this disgusting film.I must say, I watched it because I appreciated the work of the actress that played Anna.
I didn't find it very funny at first but given the unfavourable downturn her career has taken after she made this movie, I'm starting to think it might be true.I appreciate movies like "The Others" or stories like Turn of the Screw which somebody else had mentioned, but trust me, "Saint Ange" is nowhere near their level or category, not even close.
Some people seem to be still thinking about it but shouldn't feel like they're missing in an "I didn't get Donnie Darko" (great film) way because there's just nothing to get.
The shots, colors, lighting and close ups are truly amazing but it's a shame that the movie starts to bore you after halfway, also there are lots of things that don't really make sense leaving you confused and in the end it's somewhat unbearable so you pray for it to end finally.
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.
Originality doesn't matter, it's the telling of the story that matters, and like the aforementioned, this film moves at a slow pace, admittedly too slow at times but it does deliver a certain creepiness and suspense.
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.
The settings are excellent (the orphanage and the surroundings) and perfect to create the suspense and the mystic ambiance needed to a ghost story.The plot, and especially the ending, is a bit confusing but it works even better to me this way because it turns the mystery unsolved.
One other thing I did appreciate was the "surreal touch" that the movie has since the main character starts entering in the "underworld" The scene in the elevator was quite claustrophobic and the scenes in the white hospital corridors were strange It was a good surprise, since I was just expecting a film very close to "Frágiles" of the director Jaume Balagueró It is different, both movies have different plots, but even so I'm still thinking that this movie was an "inspiration source" to the Balagueró's movie.
I really wish people would be a little more fair when writing about these movies and separate the fact that THEY did not like it with whether or not it indeed was a bad film.Overall I truly felt that the director worked his @$$ off in this film and put his heart and soul into it.
If he had tightened up the pacing just a little and (I KNOW this next bit is gonna sound REAL Hollywood) livened up the visual scares a little, and would have given us much more visceral Gothic imagery and / or more startling clues (I mean COME ON, just one vague file folder and just about NOTHING else!???) Basically I feel that to make the film FAR more effective he needed to add some SUBSTANTIAL elements to drive it a bit more.
It was so melodramatic at so many points I was really thinking that a woman had directed it (NOT meaning at all to be unkind to women directors, etc., but merely that women directors USUALLY tell stories from a much more emotional and dramatic perspective then men do) So, the bottom line is, IF you have the time to kill and you are very, Very, VERY patient, you will see some very good technical film making; but, don't expect TOO much of a punch from the story itself.
You could tell where it was going, but that happens with every movie I watch, so I didn't let it dissuade me.St. Ange is very high on my 'Movies to see' list.The way they ended the film was in my opinion great.Not a big horror movie fan myself because they haven't made good horror movies in years.
it nevertheless does have all of the ghost story premises intact, a large vacant orphanage secured away in the french alps, plenty of long corridors and winding staircases, and hidden rooms, this film is shot beautifully, and I really liked Joe LoDuca's score (LoDuca having worked with Sam Raimi, Bruce Campbell and Rob Tapert on the Evil Dead films and the Xena and Hercules TV shows) The film is what it is, a nice creepy and atmospheric film to watch on a Sunday afternoon drinking a cup of coffee, and the lead actress Virgine Ledoyn is really nice on the eyes.
In 1958, in the French Alp, the young servant Anna Jurin (Virginie Ledoyen) arrives in Saint Ange Orphanage to work with Helena (Dorina Lazar) while the orphans moved to new families with the administrator Francard (Catriona MacColl).
Anna investigates the place trying to disclose the secret about the invisible children."Saint Ange" has a promising beginning that recalls Asian horror movies, and a very beautiful cinematography, but unfortunately it does not work since the story is terrible, boring and confused.
You are never really sure until the end, and even then...A first feature film for writer/director Pascal Laugier makes one look forward to his second, Martyrs, this year..
I can only conclude that most of the bad reviews here have been obsessively written by the same person, who must have some bizarre reason for loathing the director of this movie.Put simply, Saint Ange is the best ghost story I've seen in years.
Saint Ange is a slow paced and atmospheric French horror movie that has got quite a lot of negative critics.
This movie would have needed more thrills and tensions.On the good side you have the solid acting of the three women that stay at the Saint Ange orphanage.
I'm sure that many critics didn't like this movie because they thought that the ending was strange or surreal but these people didn't get the real sense of the movie as there is much more behind it than it seems but I don't want to reveal too much and suggest you to watch the movie and make up your own mind.
This movie is a well made suspense flick it will keep you on the edge until the end, this film is well made and beautifully directed, photographic scenes are superb and angles of the camera work are impressive, highly recommended, suspense at his best.
I just finished watching the movie and was so impressed with it I immediately felt compelled to find out more about it...I am very very surprised by the very many bad reviews it got...I think this movie deserves a much better rating too, so I felt compelled to leave one myself.To me the movie carried an atmosphere that kept me on the edge of my seat at all times, and it was photographically near perfection...Like some of the other comments here it also reminded me of "The devil's backbone", which I also consider brilliant.I loved the final and very original twist to the story and have never ever seen remotely like it.
Of course this being a horror film strange things begin to happen around the house prompting Virginie to try to find out the history of the house and discover its secrets.This is a film that relies a lot on creating a spooky atmosphere and I think it manages to do this very well.
However after thinking about it I would imagine the reason a lot of people don't like the film is because it does not offer any easy answers.
This was because she said (tongue in cheek?!) the Americans don't like to read subtitles!I would recommend this film, not to fans of gory horror, but to somebody who is looking for a more subtle movie..
(In this case, it wanders off into a lot of artsy shots and half-explained things, and leaves us clueless about what the movie director was trying to tell us, and NO clue about what the 'end' was supposed to be.) I hate to see movies with such a great setting, even creepier concept/idea, just...
After watching tons of American horror flicks where everything is explained and everything is just chewed for you, this one almost got me thinking that this is another french movie that has no point.How wrong I was.
She's not completely alone at Saint Ange as the cook (Dorina Lazar) is still around to help Anna and to care for the one remaining orphan, a disturbed older girl named Judith (Lou Doillon).
I don't mind a film that makes you think, but there are too many loose ends and plot points that make no sense.
"Saint Ange" is a decent if completely slow-moving ghost story.**SPOILERS**Arriving at a remote French orphanage, Anna Jurin, (Virginie Ledoyen) learns from Madame Francard, (Catriona MacColl) that the orphanage will be closing soon.
After a while (it seems like an eternity), strange things start happening and Anna is not sure whether it's real or just in her mind.Even though I sat right through this film, I still don't have much of an idea what it's about or what the point of it is.
Teaming up with creepy Judith, Anna searches for answers around the crumbling orphanage.Do you like watching 90 minutes of constant clichés to the point where you actually feel like you've already watched the same movie a dozen times?
They would cut out of the scene and start somewhere new (probably with Anna and Judith hugging, which happened about 30 times throughout the movie).
But this movie is a failure, not so much for Pascal Laugier as a director, more so as a writer.In House of Voices, the lovely Virginie Ledoyen, plays Anna, a girl with a troubled past and who is pregnant, and who arrives to work at an orphanage as part of the custodian team.
This film is nice to look at but it breaks the first rule of haunted house movies: it's ridiculously boring.
The girl screaming and giving birth on the floor with all the zombie children watching her was one of many terribly filmed scenes in this movie.
The audio was bad and the SFX was lousy and cheap.Fourth, I watched part of the behind the scenes and the director seemed to know how to waste time and the production's money and fool around on the set rather than make a real movie.
Not much more to say except that for the audience's sake, let us hope this is the last movie we see from the director of Saint Ange.I won't even go into the zombie children and the cheap thrills that this movie tries to achieve but the ending was as bad as can be expected after sitting through the rest.
And it certainly didn't help when the bulk of the running time was spent filming trivial scenes of Anna, where it was tempting to say that the director was more enamored with Virginie Ledoyen the actress, than progressing the story along a definite narration.I think there was so much potential to the movie.
I think that this movie was very good, a little confusing at times, but overall well done.
Not that really scary of a horror movie even though there is a scene or two in it that will have you jump out of your skin Saint Ange seems to really be about guilt and that guilt is what motivates Anna to do what she does throughout the movie.
i liked the fact that i had to think about "what it means" all the time, i loved this movie and i really don't understand why people found it boring, because it doesn't have bullet time it doesn't mean it's S***..
This movie wasn't that bad, until the end where the film went on some crazy tangent where they must have ran out of money or time.
First of all, don't watch it unless you want to waste one and a half hours of your life.Actually, the first 3-minute-long scene is pretty OK, you might even think it's a good movie but it's misleading.