MovieChat Forums > The Ward (2011) Discussion > John Carpenter's weakest film

John Carpenter's weakest film

posted 12 years ago by PWTempleman
22 replies | jump to latest

The overall story and ending are good and it Carpenter would have executed it better it would have been a very good movie. Although it had all of this the ending didnt mean much as the whole film itself is weak and lacking suspense. They are so many flaws in this movie but if its all in her head then it doesnt matter so much. But the acting was terrible and although this is a slasher style i'm not expecting an oscar winning performance but this was so boring. Every single character was bland, i could never care for any of them. the suspense was bland, there was only one scene i could count which nailed the suspense. i know tha carpenter hasnt exactly got a clean track of great movies he has some pretty bad ones but i was expecting something great here and it hit way too low.

of course this is only one guy's opinion and for the majority of you i may be in the wrong so i would like to hear your opinions.

[–] ThreeSadTigers 12 years ago

For me, his weakest films are The Fog, Memoirs of an Invisible Man, Village of the Damned, Vampires and Ghosts of Mars (still enjoy a couple of them, though).

This was his strongest and most interesting movie since In the Mouth of Madness; a flawed film for certain, but one with some incredibly strong moments.

[–] PWTempleman 12 years ago

I've never seen In The Mouth Of Madness but I would consider The Fog in his top 5. The Ward should be his strongest if he executed it probably, i feel when i watch this film like its undeveloped and should have been tackled in a different approach.

[–] Smokey_T 8 years ago

I have not seen Memoirs, and I'm glad having a read.

I think it would be difficult to make worse films than Vampires (James Woods casting as the hero alone doomed that film), and Ghost of mars which I only remember as very B grade when it released.

The Fog is actually quite a solid, and particularly Carpenterish film. The only disappointment that I always felt is the thing int he fog is just a bunch of silly pirates...

The Myst was more like what I wanted (to be scared of).

Carpenter's biggest contribution to horror (outside of his ridiculous synth music) was the dumbing down of the villain/genre to meaningless violence/threat with Michael Myers.

But I always enjoyed his better b-graders: Escape From New York, Halloween 3 (although I see now he was just the producer), The Thing, BTiLC, and the guilty pleasure They Live.

These aren't great films, they aren't really even that good, but they entertain, and make no apologies for what they are.

[–] buckaroobanzai50 12 years ago

"Every single character was bland, i could never care for any of them."
"...the suspense was bland,"

Two good reasons why it didn't work. Even if everything is in her head, it wasn't scary, and I didn't care who got murdered.

[–] netlord80-1 11 years ago

The basic plot had been done 7 years earlier in Identity. Now I loved Identity, it was very suspenseful and you really cared about the people even though they were just other personalities. In that film, they played it off for a while as one of the people being a murderer but you didn't know who. This movie on the other had was just boring from the start. They did things in a way that you couldn't just explain it away. The whole vengeful ghost thing fell flat from the start. And if it was a vengeful ghost then how could you kill it with an ax? To me that was just silly. This type of story can be done well, it just wasn't in this case.

[–] Hey_Sweden 12 years ago

I found it disappointing. Technically, I don't think it was badly done but it was just weak material. Carpenter should have chosen a better script for his comeback.

What do you think this is, a signature? It's a way of life!

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] robatmuskoka 11 years ago

too true

[–] SATerp 11 years ago

I'm just happy that Carpenter was able to find a use for some of that leftover alien makeup from The Ghosts of Mars.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RomeoKnight 10 years ago

I was also let down by the name John Carpenter. He has made some excellent horror movies and this was just too typical and generic. Done million times before. It was entertaining though.

[–] proflandry 10 years ago

It was watchable, which "Ghosts of Mars" was barely. I would say it was among his weakest movies, only in that aside from "Ghosts of Mars," any of his other movies I would rank above this one. O.k., "Vampires" I would rank below this one, and I liked "Vampires."

I would give "The Ward" and "Vampires" a solid C, "Ghosts of Mars" an F. So, though I would say it was weak, I still liked it, and would say there is a huge drop off between his weaker films and his worst.

Though, it didn't really feel like a Carpenter film. Can't really say why. The score maybe? The lack of humor? Usually his films have a little humor in them. Though, the more I think about it, I guess not all of them. And yes, it has been done a million times. But again, not his best, but still enjoyable.

[–] lazarillo 10 years ago

"Memoirs of the Invisible Man" is the equivalent an inflamed hemorrhoid on the unwiped ass of this film.

I thought this film was alright, definitely not the best Carpenter film, but far from the worst. . .

[–] PastichioRocker 10 years ago

Memoirs definitely is the worst Carpenter movie. I kinda liked the campiness of Ghosts of Mars. It's basically a sci-fi version of Assault on Precinct 13.

The Ward on the other hand suffers from predictable scares and a mediocre script. Acting was okay and so was the music, but the worst offender was that I never got the feeling I was watching a Carpenter flick. At least Ghosts did accomplish that, so I would rate The Ward below that movie.

[–] babyfir77 10 years ago

I have this as the second worst Carpenter film. Can't beat out Dark Star.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]