REVIEW: JOHN CARPENTER’S THE WARD

Sigh.  Dilemma:  there is no way I'm not seeing this, but do I wait until the theatrical run, or go cheap and get the VOD next week?  Is this at least big-screen material?

No, not really. VOD might actually be the most logical bet; its a very small feeling film. I guess it just depends on to what degree you wish to support Carpenter.

I will score his weed and prop him up on the set - that's how willing to support Carpenter I am.  I haven't seen this movie yet, but I know that you're WRONG WRONG WRONG!!

dammit...wrong i say...

Fair enough on the review, but how does it fare against Survival of the Dead and/or Sucker Punch?

Let's hope that this IS a warm up so the man can get his stride back and bring us PRINCES OF DARKNESS!

I'm just happy he is actually enthusiastic about directing again, even if it took making an apparently subpar film to do it.  Here's hoping he sticks with it and a little of that old magic returns.  I'm not expecting another classic, but I'd love something solid and/or interesting to come from him again.  He has enough projects in-development (5 ot 6 to be exact) that he should be able to get a couple of them off the ground over the next few years.................so long as he actually wants to.

Yeah, this was the suck.

More details, if anyone's interested.

Not that I really care, but aside from PJ flashing her stuff in Halloween, Carpenter's never been a nudity guy, has he? I mean, here, he's got an actress who'll do nudity, and he's got a shower scene, and: no nudity.

That isn't one of the film's many problems, it just amused me.

So this is basically Gothika 2?

This is hitting my shores next week. I'll still catch it because I am a Carpenter fan.

Oh, a Carpenter fan can't not see this. I'm just saying it'll break your heart.

The only people I can imagine enjoying this are people who have never seen a Carpenter movie. Or a horror movie. Or a movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

Oh, a Carpenter fan can't not see this. I'm just saying it'll break your heart.

 

Wanna see this but I checked both the PS3 store and my cable's On Demand section, and it's still not up yet.

Saw this today.

The biggest problem is the uninvolving story and the "twist" is so obvious. I liked Amber Heard as a Leading lady though. Also Carpenter's direction wasn't that bad as well.

If anybody is interested in seeing this on the big screen, the list of theaters that are showing The Ward has been revealed.

http://theward.cinedigm.com/

Guess I'm going up to Danvers soon.

I don't know where you live in relation to Danvers, but this movie is so not worth making any kind of pilgrimage to see, even if you're a huge Carpenter fan.

This is not a John Carpenter movie. I love John Carpenter. This is BARELY like a John Carpenter movie. It feels like one of those inoffensive low budget chillers that would go straight-to-DVD from Ghost House or something.

Amber Heard still rocks, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Benenson 

I don't know where you live in relation to Danvers, but this movie is so not worth making any kind of pilgrimage to see, even if you're a huge Carpenter fan.

I'm about 30 minutes away from the theater that is playing this. So, it's not that big of a trip. I just find it hard to believe that it is that bad. It seems that a good chunk of Carpenter's films get trashed when they come out and then slowly people start to go, "Oh, wait! John Carpenter's "Fill in the Blank" was actually pretty good."

Nah, it's just super bland. I'll be shocked if it gets embraced over time, and if it does it will be out of blind love for Carpenter, not because of the film itself. I think that's why some people have started giving some of his 90s films a pass - "It's not that good (or it's outright bad) but I love Carpenter, sooo..."

His 90's films are way more fun than this. I can rewatch VAMPIRES and GHOSTS OF MARS without a problem.

This seems like an average episode of a TV Anthology series. It's not terrible mind you, just bland and nothing special.

What killed me about this movie is that Carpenter made a film with an atmospheric opening scene murder, then has 45 minutes of girls hanging out and talking before any more killing happens.

33 years later, he made another one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

More details, if anyone's interested.

 

"And there’s nobody remotely bad-ass here — no Charles Cyphers, no Tom Atkins, no Adrienne Barbeau as the nurse, nobody."

This was my big takeaway; in the past, Carpenter's gotten a LOT of mileage on some Olsen-twin-thin narratives by filling them with great character actors. Aside from Jared Harris, who doesn't have much to do here, this was Bland City. Though I am now a pervy fan of Lyndsy Fonseca (I didn't connect her roles in Kick-Ass and Hot Tub Time Machine until seeing her in this).

Shit, I remember the various girls in Girl, Interrupted a lot more vividly after 12 years than I remember the girls in The Ward after five months.

I'll defend this flick.  That's right.  I liked it.  I would love to see Carpenter team up with Dean Cundey again and have an actual budget and total creative control, but those days are long gone unfortunately.  Even if Carp just came in and set up shots then let his first AD do the rest, it's still better than most of what passes for horror these days. 

Money has never been Carpenter's problem, as I don't think his best stuff had any kind of budget. Halloween was 320,000 (1.1 million in 2011 dollars, and 20,000 of it went to Pleasance) and Assault cost something like 70,000 (279,000 in today money).  Even The Thing only shakes out to about 37 million after inflation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil 

Money has never been Carpenter's problem, as I don't think his best stuff had any kind of budget. Halloween was 320,000 (1.1 million in 2011 dollars, and 20,000 of it went to Pleasance) and Assault cost something like 70,000 (279,000 in today money).  Even The Thing only shakes out to about 37 million after inflation.

You're talking about his earliest movies, and the movie business has changed a lot since then.  You could patch together distribution with almost nothing, not today.  And The Thing had a huge budget for him.  I think other than Invisible Man it was his highest budget film ever.  He has said he made Starman as a "director for hire" just to prove that he could make a movie that made money to get other projects funded.  But anyway, today, it's a whole different world than it was then and Carp is in no shape to go running around shooting guerilla-style like he did circa Assault/Halloween.  Getting a decent budget has been a roadblock for him since Vampires. 

I'm not sure what you're arguing. I was demonstrating that Carpenter often excelled with very small budgets, in response to "I would love to see Carpenter team up with Dean Cundey again and have an actual budget." Do you think The Ward needed more money spent on it? Or that its visuals fell short of how Carpenter wanted them to look? It's one of his most polished looking films.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil 

I'm not sure what you're arguing. I was demonstrating that Carpenter often excelled with very small budgets, in response to "I would love to see Carpenter team up with Dean Cundey again and have an actual budget." Do you think The Ward needed more money spent on it? Or that its visuals fell short of how Carpenter wanted them to look? It's one of his most polished looking films.

Oh I see.  I agree.  He could do a lot with little back then.  But he's not a young man anymore and I think it's hard for an accomplished filmmaker to go back to guerilla-style filmmaking.  What I'm saying is I would like to see a movie that looked like his early movies looked -- from Assault to Big Trouble -- that rich yet naturalistic lighting and perfect composition that resulted from the Carp/Cundey partnership.  Carp never got it back and none of Cundey's movies with other directors look like that.  I think for him to really unleash his abilities, he'd need a budget to hire that kind of talent. 

Sure, but Carpenter's got to keep up with the Joneses, so to speak. When you've got Thing prequels on one side and Drive on the other and Grindhouse in the rear-view, Carpenter's probably not too nostalgic about making a fetishistic film that looks like his vintage stuff, and it's doubtful audiences would eat it up, either. He's painted himself into a corner, and The Ward felt like him trying to figure out where else he can go. I don't think The Ward was a success, but like most folks who've chimed in, I hope he keeps trying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil 

Sure, but Carpenter's got to keep up with the Joneses, so to speak. When you've got Thing prequels on one side and Drive on the other and Grindhouse in the rear-view, Carpenter's probably not too nostalgic about making a fetishistic film that looks like his vintage stuff, and it's doubtful audiences would eat it up, either. He's painted himself into a corner, and The Ward felt like him trying to figure out where else he can go. I don't think The Ward was a success, but like most folks who've chimed in, I hope he keeps trying.

I liked it but I don't think it's his "comeback" movie.  I think it was a thing he was offered with modest funding in place, and he did it.  I don't really see it as his comeback movie.  It's a scrappy little ghost story with a twist that's well made but not really a "Carpenter movie."  But this is the kind of thing he gets offered, and it's a paying gig so why not.   

I don't think he'd be interested in redoing what he's done in the past either, but I also don't think he's really got the power to make the kind of movie that would represent a "next step" or a true comeback for him.  And I'd trade in all the second and third generation xeroxes like the Thing prequel etc. for a true return to form from the original.

This is not only Carpenter's worst film, but one of the worst horror movies I have seen in a long time.  I agree with what others have said that some of his 90's movies, while not "good" are much more watchable, and even somewhat enjoyable, but this movie...I hate to say it, is garbage.  I couldn't help but cringe at how bad it was.  His Masters of Horror episodes were better than this.

I would have liked this a lot better if it opened with one of Carpenter's cheesy guitar riffs. "I'm gonna scare the pants off you. But first, how 'bout a sample of THESE tasty licks?"

All movies should start with John Carpenter music.

Got the dvd a few weeks ago, and thought the same thing a lot of folks on here do. It's pretty mediocre, and aside from the title JOHN CARPENTER'S THE WARD, and the Panavision Scope format, it's something just about anyone could have done. Even his Masters Of Horror episodes feel like Carpenter films. I didn't flat out hate it. At least he's still working, and apparently it's gotten him re-interested in doing more films.

All the word about this movie has been a massive bummer, but I'll still see it anyway. No doubt it'll disappoint me too, but I'll still take it on the chin and hope that this is the first step on the road to Carpenter's return to glory.

I still believe, J.C. Oh, I still believe.

It's not a massive bummer.  It's not the second coming or anything but it's a fun flick.  It's got some Carpenter shots in it.  The girls are all really good.  I liked it.  But I would love to see a full-on Carpenter movie.  The funny thing about him is he doesn't seem to consider himself any great auteur, which is bizarre considering his incredible body of work.  But like you and Timmy Cappello, I still believe too. 

Yeah, that's the sad part: the last few years he's seemed genuinely apathetic and/or down on himself. Here's hoping that this is a sign that the fire's coming back, because I've just missed having Carpenter around. He's one of those genuine guys you can't help but be grateful is out there doing the job.

In an interview once he talked about how The Thing's reception killed him, not just among critics but moviegoers, his fans.  Here he'd poured everything he had into this incredible movie, one that obviously stands the test of time and started showing up on top ten lists years later, but at the time it was reviled by everyone.  I wonder how his story might have been different if people had appreciated that movie at the time. 

I was young, but I do remember the viciousness of "The Thing"s reception. Even Fangoria magazine treated it as a disappointment, saying it was far inferior to his prior films. Some sort of mass psychosis going on. I can't even fathom what it was they were expecting that disappointed them so much. 

I remember going to see it in the theater on opening night and the place was empty.  It was the year of E.T.  People wanted to be reassured, I guess, and The Thing was dark medicine. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by yt 

In an interview once he talked about how The Thing's reception killed him, not just among critics but moviegoers, his fans.  Here he'd poured everything he had into this incredible movie, one that obviously stands the test of time and started showing up on top ten lists years later, but at the time it was reviled by everyone.  I wonder how his story might have been different if people had appreciated that movie at the time. 

It's this reason I always thought Carpenter had thin skin. I mean, the movie is regarded as a landmark of the genre. At the time it was hated but get over it already. Seems like vindication would only be that much sweeter. Instead of getting a swaggering chip on his shoulder he was worn down into a little nub ad never recovered. If Carpenter had a stronger personality I think his filmography would have been even that much better. 

Perhaps.  I certainly don't know what's in his head.  I'm just guessing.  He's one of the greats though, in my mind. 

Well here's my take on it. As far as I remember, my mum showed me The Thing in, I think, '89 or '90 - not that long after the film's original release, really. I though, and think to this day, that it was fuckawesome. People may have been weighed down by the 'remake' baggage at the time, but you can't deny that the film eventually found a wide audience - the very existence of its 'remakeboot' proves that.

All respect to you BlackyShimSham, but I don't think that Carpenter's decline can be put down to a weakness of personality. t's a common myth that artists purely succeed through one-eyed stubbornness, but long-term success is just as influenced by the zeitgeist as anything else, and that's something that's incredibly fickle. Like most artists, Carpenter has a very specific aesthetic that, IMO, gradually fell out of favour. The process started with The Thing, and from that point the general public had moved past the style of film Carpenter had to offer. Bear  in mind that although he's come up with his fair share of shitty movies he's also produced some damn strong work - They Live, Prince of Darkness and In the Mouth of Madness may not stand as completely equal to his early work, but they come damned close.

Nevertheless, Carpenter's style is something that IMO stopped 'gelling' with the aesthetic of the film industry from early-mid 80s on, and it's the kind of industry where everyone either loves you and wants to work with you or treats you like some kind of leper. I think JC had a strong start, the industry moved on from his particular aesthetic and he's been struggling ever since. It's happened to many great filmmakers; even Tarantino seemed to fall out of favour until he bounced back with Kill Bill. I think JC has been doing what he can but feeling lost, and the longer he's gone without a hit the more lost he's become (his Masterof Horror episode got good notices, but it seems the show wasn't high-profile enough to fully kickstart his career)

That's how I'd describe Carpenter: Lost. The fact that he's come out and made a new film is IMO a great sign that the fire is returning, Certainly, there seems to be a reappreciation of his work amongst geeks in recent years, which is bleeding into the films of new filmmakers (Notice that the aliens in Attack The Block make, as far as I can remember, exactly or near-as-dammit the same sound as The Thing) I think Carpenter is an artist who has been lacking that thing that makes all artists perform to their best: a sense of relevance. Hopefully, from the sounds of it the zeitgeist may just be catching up to him all over again - he is, after all, loved by so many of us - and maybe, just maybe, he can ride it back to approaching the form of his classics.

Basically, the relationship between the artist and popular taste is complicated and fickle at the best of times, but there's always the chance that'll change. I'd much rather the guy keep creating, even if it isn't his best work, and eventually the zeigeist will catch up to him again. I think it'll happen, and that he fully deserves it. 

Carpenter has many issues, a weak personality isn't one of them.

Thank you for pointing this out. People are quick to mention how "he was never the same after Cundey left" or whatever, but you don't really hear much about how Cundey was just a bit less special too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Workyticket 

Well here's my take on it. As far as I remember, my mum showed me The Thing in, I think, '89 or '90 - not that long after the film's original release, really. I though, and think to this day, that it was fuckawesome. People may have been weighed down by the 'remake' baggage at the time, but you can't deny that the film eventually found a wide audience - the very existence of its 'remakeboot' proves that.

 

All respect to you BlackyShimSham, but I don't think that Carpenter's decline can be put down to a weakness of personality. t's a common myth that artists purely succeed through one-eyed stubbornness, but long-term success is just as influenced by the zeitgeist as anything else, and that's something that's incredibly fickle. Like most artists, Carpenter has a very specific aesthetic that, IMO, gradually fell out of favour. The process started with The Thing, and from that point the general public had moved past the style of film Carpenter had to offer. Bear  in mind that although he's come up with his fair share of shitty movies he's also produced some damn strong work - They Live, Prince of Darkness and In the Mouth of Madness may not stand as completely equal to his early work, but they come damned close.

 

Nevertheless, Carpenter's style is something that IMO stopped 'gelling' with the aesthetic of the film industry from early-mid 80s on, and it's the kind of industry where everyone either loves you and wants to work with you or treats you like some kind of leper. I think JC had a strong start, the industry moved on from his particular aesthetic and he's been struggling ever since. It's happened to many great filmmakers; even Tarantino seemed to fall out of favour until he bounced back with Kill Bill. I think JC has been doing what he can but feeling lost, and the longer he's gone without a hit the more lost he's become (his Masterof Horror episode got good notices, but it seems the show wasn't high-profile enough to fully kickstart his career)

 

That's how I'd describe Carpenter: Lost. The fact that he's come out and made a new film is IMO a great sign that the fire is returning, Certainly, there seems to be a reappreciation of his work amongst geeks in recent years, which is bleeding into the films of new filmmakers (Notice that the aliens in Attack The Block make, as far as I can remember, exactly or near-as-dammit the same sound as The Thing) I think Carpenter is an artist who has been lacking that thing that makes all artists perform to their best: a sense of relevance. Hopefully, from the sounds of it the zeitgeist may just be catching up to him all over again - he is, after all, loved by so many of us - and maybe, just maybe, he can ride it back to approaching the form of his classics.

 

Basically, the relationship between the artist and popular taste is complicated and fickle at the best of times, but there's always the chance that'll change. I'd much rather the guy keep creating, even if it isn't his best work, and eventually the zeigeist will catch up to him again. I think it'll happen, and that he fully deserves it. 

Very thought-provoking, I agree Carpenter is a bit lost, that's probably a better way of phrasing it than invoking his personality. Maybe he's even burned out, from what I've heard. I also hoped that 'Cigarette Burns' would kickstart his career but it didn't really lead anywhere. I believe his follow-up episode was centered in an abortion clinic, with Ron Perlman, correct? I did a blind buy of that based on the strength of his first episode, and boy was it bad. Just dismal. I would have never have guessed it was Carpenter behind the camera, except for maybe some semi-competent staging including the security guard character standing off with Perlman's rednecks.  Very, very disappointing. Although, I haven't heard it first hand, apparently on the commentary Carpenter leaves during the hour to take a smoke break. Not sure if that's true, but either way, I think that about sums him up at this point. 

Honestly, I think he'd rather just watch basketball, get stoned and collect the paychecks from the various remakes/sequels.

I've probably said that before, maybe even in this thread. Still holds.

Also something I've said before: I don't think he really wanted to be Horror Guy. After a while, that was all the suits would give him money for. So I kinda don't blame him for saying "fuck it" and resting on his laurels, which are considerable laurels.

A friend who's a Carpenter fan and insisted he liked The Ward compared it to me, the Kubrick die-hard, liking Eyes Wide Shut. One of these things is not like the other.

I would think it's because Carpenter's films usually hit harder, faster than The Thing, at least until the movie sinks in. It was something like ten years ago when my not-movie-literate father watched The Fog and The Thing in the same weekend and said The Fog was way better.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disciple_72 

 

Carpenter has many issues, a weak personality isn't one of them.

 

 

Thank you for pointing this out. People are quick to mention how "he was never the same after Cundey left" or whatever, but you don't really hear much about how Cundey was just a bit less special too.

Oh, it was definitely the synthesis.  Cundey's post-Carpenter filmography is all over the place, with some high points amid a bunch of indistinguishable titles.  He had a signature with Carpenter, a thumbprint, and it came from the combination of their talents.  Carpenter continued to make good looking movies because he's a goddamn professional, but I miss "the look."  I asked him on twitter if he'd ever team up with Cundey again.  His response, "Anything's possible."

Workyticket, I love your post. 
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Blank 

Honestly, I think he'd rather just watch basketball, get stoned and collect the paychecks from the various remakes/sequels.

 

I've probably said that before, maybe even in this thread. Still holds.

 

Also something I've said before: I don't think he really wanted to be Horror Guy. After a while, that was all the suits would give him money for. So I kinda don't blame him for saying "fuck it" and resting on his laurels, which are considerable laurels.

 

A friend who's a Carpenter fan and insisted he liked The Ward compared it to me, the Kubrick die-hard, liking Eyes Wide Shut. One of these things is not like the other.

I don't think so.  If you look at his life, the one thing he wanted to do was to have an effect on people the way--what movie was it, maybe The Day the Earth Stood Still I think?--had on him.  He lived out in the sticks and didn't have all the resources a lot of his contemporaries had, but he loved the medium and explored every inch of it from childhood on.  He came out of the gate with a movie that had such low expectations, even by him, but because of his incredible eye, storytelling prowess and technical mastery, it stood out from the rest.  This is what he was born to do.  This is what he belongs doing.  I don't think he's content to watch basketball, get stoned and collect paychecks (though I'm sure he enjoys all three).  I think it's closer to what Workyticket details--it's a huge blow to be not only told but shown that you're irrelevant somehow, the world has moved on, to be soundly rejected.  It's like, what's the point?  I do think you're right about he didn't necessarily want to be the Horror Guy though.  He considers it a lesser work but I think what he did with Starman was staggering--I love that movie.

As to Eyes Wide Shut, I loved it and defend it to this day.  There's nothing wrong with responding to something other people don't respond to, which is why I don't have any problem copping to liking The Ward.  We're all different.  We all see different things. 

In response to WorkyTicket's excellent post:

Another way to see it is that Carpenter has a singular vision, and it is not one that easily synchs up with the Zeitgeist. It did with Halloween, and that is the movie that made his rep in Hollywood (I.E. made lots of bucks). His follow-up, The Fog, was a quiet, slow burning horror film that had massive re-shoots to add gore and action (Carpenter himself says it "sucked" on the DVD Extra). The Thing was regarded as a massive failure, but also represents a purity of vision (no way that film was written by committee). Christine was so so. Big Trouble in Little China flopped. Those later films got significant marketing dollars and did not return (short term) the studio's money. Meanwhile guys like Spielberg etc were tearing it up at the Box Office.

I do agree with you that the wheel may be turning. The current Film market is now segmented and if guys like Kevin Smith can reliably draw $30M a picture, Carpenter can too.

It is interesting to think about whether his style would even fit the market of today. He has a lot in common with Walter Hill, in my opinion. Hill's ultra-macho style just stopped connecting with audiences overall (though I've always loved it). Seemed it started happening when the female action hero became much more common, and it didn't quite synch with Hill's more man-centric attitude (I won't say misogynistic, because I don't feel that's the case). Just seems Carpenter was similar in that he was always more comfortable in the same way. Natasha Hentsridge in "Ghosts of Mars" feels forced as hell. The attempts at female bonding in "The Ward", as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Disciple_72 

Carpenter has many issues, a weak personality isn't one of them.

Indeed.  Anyone thinking his "attitude" in interviews over the past five years is something new is crazy.  Go and dig up some interviews with the man from the late 70s or early 80s.  He was just as self-deprecating then as he is now.  He even cracked all of the "I'm a capitalist, where's my paycheck?" bits back then too.  Aside from being more laid back, his attitude and personality is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago.

As for The Ward?  This got made as his "return" simply because it came along at the right moment and he said "why not?".  It is not something he was developing for awhile.  The man has quite a few projects on his plate and none of them were ready-to-go yet, so he made The Ward when it came across his desk.  For better or worse, it has allowed him to ease back into feature filmmaking and he seems a lot more enthusiastic about moviemaking now.  It also doesn't look like he plans on taking another long hiatus, considering the amount of projects he has in the works.  The top three seem the most likely to get made...

Untitled Gothic Horror Western

- Yep, an honest-to-God period piece Western................with cannibals!  John keeps talking this one up nowadays and seems really enthusiastic about it, so let's hope it gets made.

Hollywood

- A horror anthology project with interlocking stories ala Pulp Fiction.  Previously titled L.A. Gothic.

The Prince

- An Unforgiven-esque gangster flick with no genre elements.

Kill Yourself Rich

- A thriller written by John McLaughlin (Black Swan, Parker).

Darkchylde

- Comic adaptation.

Asylum

- An adaptation of the comic he has co-created.

Fangland and Psychopath are dead.  Nic Cage is supposedly still interested in doing Riot at some point, but it is effectively dead at the moment.

Well, that's good to hear!  I would take any of the first three.  I hope he gets he gets back in the director's chair, the sooner the better.