Search
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Session 9 (2001) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Gordon Fleming specializes in removing asbestos, but is having a hard time finding work while him and his wife just had a baby. That is until he's contacted by Bill Griggs, the owner of an abandoned mental hospital. The hospital needs a lot of work and Gordon brings his second, Phil, along with him to check it out. What is originally a three week job gets negotiated down to one week that includes a $10,000 bonus for every man involved. Gordon leads a five man team that will have to work their hardest to get the job done on time, but what starts out as a great job slowly snowballs into the most horrific thing any of them could have imagined. The crew begins turning on each other as heated arguments seem to escalate as quickly as they began. Each man begins to act strangely and differently than when they first arrived. Something that used to be in the hospital still resides deep within its darkness infested corridors and is beginning to plague Gordon's team. Some would even say that fear isn't a feeling or an emotion. It's a place that preys on the weak and the wounded.
The atmosphere in this film is just brilliant. The setting puts you on edge to begin with since it takes place in an abandoned mental hospital, but even deserted there's just something about the building that doesn't seem right. It's like something has infected the structure down to its core. The setting seems to rely heavily on luminescence or the lack thereof. Even when a room in the hospital is illuminated, it still feels dark. Darkness still overwhelms it like it's hiding something. In addition to that, there's the Mary Hobbes subplot that makes the film that much more disturbing. But the less you know about that going into the film, the better.
While the film has a fantastic atmosphere, it seems to be lacking something to make it a superb film. Everything seems to be there as the script is good, the writing is top notch, can't complain about the acting, there's a bit of a twist in the ending that's really well done, and the film stays with you long after you watch it. The best explanation is that it had all the elements of a superb film, but it dropped the ball slightly in its execution. The pieces of the puzzle weren't put together in exactly the right way, but were put together in a way that still resulted in a good psychological horror film.
Session 9 is the perfect horror film for people who like films that mess with their head. It gets beneath your skin and stays there. While the film is practically a cult classic and contains all the elements of a great horror film, it seems to be lacking something. The best way to explain it is to say Session 9 is a superb psychological horror film that just wasn't as good to this reviewer as it is to others, but that could always change with repeat viewings of the film.
The atmosphere in this film is just brilliant. The setting puts you on edge to begin with since it takes place in an abandoned mental hospital, but even deserted there's just something about the building that doesn't seem right. It's like something has infected the structure down to its core. The setting seems to rely heavily on luminescence or the lack thereof. Even when a room in the hospital is illuminated, it still feels dark. Darkness still overwhelms it like it's hiding something. In addition to that, there's the Mary Hobbes subplot that makes the film that much more disturbing. But the less you know about that going into the film, the better.
While the film has a fantastic atmosphere, it seems to be lacking something to make it a superb film. Everything seems to be there as the script is good, the writing is top notch, can't complain about the acting, there's a bit of a twist in the ending that's really well done, and the film stays with you long after you watch it. The best explanation is that it had all the elements of a superb film, but it dropped the ball slightly in its execution. The pieces of the puzzle weren't put together in exactly the right way, but were put together in a way that still resulted in a good psychological horror film.
Session 9 is the perfect horror film for people who like films that mess with their head. It gets beneath your skin and stays there. While the film is practically a cult classic and contains all the elements of a great horror film, it seems to be lacking something. The best way to explain it is to say Session 9 is a superb psychological horror film that just wasn't as good to this reviewer as it is to others, but that could always change with repeat viewings of the film.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Dead Ringers (1988) in Movies
Sep 15, 2020 (Updated Sep 15, 2020)
Whats The Difference Between Us
Dead Ringers- is a decent movie, its the last movie david cronenberg did in the 80's. So his 80's streak ending on a low ball/a dispointment. I really liked Jeremy Irons he was really good. And the psychological espect was good as well. Other than that it was a okay movie.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
The Plot: Elliot (Jeremy Irons), a successful gynecologist, works at the same practice as his identical twin, Beverly (also Irons). Elliot is attracted to many of his patients and has affairs with them. When he inevitably loses interest, he will give the woman over to Beverly, the meeker of the two, without the woman knowing the difference. Beverly falls hard for one of the patients, Claire (Geneviève Bujold), but when she inadvertently deceives him, he slips into a state of madness.
In his DVD commentary, Irons claims that Robert De Niro declined playing the Mantles due to his unease with the subject matter and portraying gynecologists, while William Hurt decided to reject the parts because "it is hard enough to play one role".
Irons was given two different dressing rooms with two sets of costumes for playing his two characters. However, given the fact that he said "the whole point of the story is you should sometimes be confused as to which is which", he chose to use only one of the rooms and combine different costume items intended for different characters. Irons also developed an "internal way" to portray each character, employing the Alexander technique for "different energy points", giving each character his own appearance.
Like i said before the psychological espect is good in this. Jeremy Irons was excellent. I wouldnt really recordmend this film, rather davids other 80's films instead.
The Merry Spinster: Tales of Everyday Horror
5.0
Rate It
Book
A collection of darkly playful stories based on classic folk and fairy tales (but with a feminist...
Housewife of Horror (12 KP) rated The Canal (2014) in Movies
Aug 25, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Canal (2014)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)
Suswatibasu (1703 KP) rated Split (2016) in Movies
Oct 19, 2017 (Updated Oct 19, 2017)
A little better from M Night Shyamalan, but still not spectacular
By far, James McAvoy steals the show in this psychological thriller, in which he plays 23 different personalities. Suffering from the condition Dissociative Identity Disorder, McAvoy reveals a dark side, where he kidnaps three girls and holds them hostage to his whims, while attempting to seek help from a psychiatrist. In between, we see one girl in particular engage with him, the trauma also bringing out her own demons. And of course a mandatory cameo from the director himself.
While the story has potential, and his acting is flawless - it lacks substance somewhat. Apart from his 'transformation', the film seems to have been created mainly on the premise that there will be a sequel, so you're left in limbo at the end with a small clue of what's next.
It's not particularly scary, so I wouldn't deem it a horror movie as such. The girls' kidnapping also seems slightly pointless, like tools in the movie so that they can showcase Kevin's (the main personality) different sides and what a 'monster' he is. Disappointing, but better than Shyamalan's recent terrible films.
While the story has potential, and his acting is flawless - it lacks substance somewhat. Apart from his 'transformation', the film seems to have been created mainly on the premise that there will be a sequel, so you're left in limbo at the end with a small clue of what's next.
It's not particularly scary, so I wouldn't deem it a horror movie as such. The girls' kidnapping also seems slightly pointless, like tools in the movie so that they can showcase Kevin's (the main personality) different sides and what a 'monster' he is. Disappointing, but better than Shyamalan's recent terrible films.
365Flicks (235 KP) rated Stairs (2019) in Movies
Nov 2, 2019
Toby Osmond (3 more)
Story
Tom Paton
Alana Wallace
Don't Go Down
This movie is everything you would hope for in a Tom Paton flick and a hell of a lot more. A high concept psychological horror/thriller like you wouldnt believe that plays in the sci-fi genre realm. So yeah its a mind melding genre bending smorgasboard.
With Samantha Schnitzler and Bently Kalu (Ben Garrett) doing arguably a fair chunk of the heavy lifting, I am always happy to see these guys share the screen. Bently just seems to have this protective nature when his characters interact with Sam's, Schnitzler is always on point as a total Bad Ass and this time gets to play with her more emotional side.
This movie is more than an actioner, its more than a thriller... Stairs lives in many genres while silently making its own. I have said it before and I will say it one more time, the team behind this movie just took one hell of a step in their already solid game to that next level. Lets just hope it doesnt send them back to the start (see what I did there).
With Samantha Schnitzler and Bently Kalu (Ben Garrett) doing arguably a fair chunk of the heavy lifting, I am always happy to see these guys share the screen. Bently just seems to have this protective nature when his characters interact with Sam's, Schnitzler is always on point as a total Bad Ass and this time gets to play with her more emotional side.
This movie is more than an actioner, its more than a thriller... Stairs lives in many genres while silently making its own. I have said it before and I will say it one more time, the team behind this movie just took one hell of a step in their already solid game to that next level. Lets just hope it doesnt send them back to the start (see what I did there).
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Flatliners (2017) in Movies
Feb 27, 2020 (Updated Feb 27, 2020)
Just A Flat Line......
Flatliners- is a remake that i forgot that came out in 2017. I love the oringal and think its a very underrated film that has a great cast. I like Kiefer's cameo/small role in this film, their is a delted scene where it connects to the oringal film. So thats cool. I mean Ellen Page was good in it, and i like some of the psychological espects, that how the past haunts you and the past will bite you. Other than that this film was bad, really bad, awful.
The Plot: Five medical students embark on a daring and dangerous experiment to gain insight into the mystery of what lies beyond the confines of life. The bold adventure begins when they trigger near-death experiences by stopping their hearts for short periods of time. As their trials become more perilous, each must confront the sins from their past while facing the paranormal consequences of journeying to the other side.
Just skip this film, and go watch the oringal film. Cause like i said its a very underrated psycological horror jem.
The Plot: Five medical students embark on a daring and dangerous experiment to gain insight into the mystery of what lies beyond the confines of life. The bold adventure begins when they trigger near-death experiences by stopping their hearts for short periods of time. As their trials become more perilous, each must confront the sins from their past while facing the paranormal consequences of journeying to the other side.
Just skip this film, and go watch the oringal film. Cause like i said its a very underrated psycological horror jem.
Kirk Bage (1775 KP) rated The Fury (1978) in Movies
Mar 3, 2020 (Updated Mar 5, 2020)
In the last of this list we skip forward 16 years and some 25 film credits. Not that there wasn’t any work of quality in that period, but because the edge that existed in the younger man had undoubtedly waned, with Douglas often miscast or out of his depth. Aged 62 he stumbles upon a role in a psychological horror movie that is quintessentially 70s. The reason I believe this is the last movie of real note he made is that it was a committed performance that returned him to the idea of being an angry underdog. Essentially a thriller, Douglas revels in the fear and anguish of a father pushed to the edge of his abilities to save his son. Even though he would go on to make many more films, you feel the last of his real fire was given to this role. It also proves to me that despite a lifetime of activity the real grist of his career lasted only 16 years: 1946 – 1962. The rest was a man who knew cinema better than anyone, but couldn’t always outrun his own type-casting.
Donnie Darko (2001)
8.1
Rate It
Movie Watch
Donnie Darko is a psychological science fiction and drama written and directed by Richard Kelly. ...
Science Fiction Drama Horror Themes
Awix (3310 KP) rated A Wrinkle in the Skin in Books
Sep 13, 2019
Almost relentlessly bleak SF-disaster novel. An immense series of global earthquakes destroys civilisation overnight, leaving only a handful of survivors. The protagonist has previously been emotionally self-sufficient, but can he maintain this attitude in the face of the horror and desolation around him?
Worlds away from the 'cosy catastrophe' label which this kind of book is occasionally lumbered with, this anticipates The Road in many ways: the central image is of a man and a boy making their way across the devastated landscape, scavenging to survive and trying to avoid lawless mobs of other survivors. Christopher's ideas about human nature are crushingly cynical but unpleasantly compelling; the psychological depth of this book makes most similar works of fiction look frivolous and lightweight. Still, for all the skill with which it is written, this story is both tragic and depressing (the book does a good job of making you realise the difference between the two). It's telling that while it concludes on the promise of hope, it's only a promise: an actual happy ending would feel grotesquely inappropriate. Not without its strengths, but a tough read in many ways - other apocalypses are much more fun.
Worlds away from the 'cosy catastrophe' label which this kind of book is occasionally lumbered with, this anticipates The Road in many ways: the central image is of a man and a boy making their way across the devastated landscape, scavenging to survive and trying to avoid lawless mobs of other survivors. Christopher's ideas about human nature are crushingly cynical but unpleasantly compelling; the psychological depth of this book makes most similar works of fiction look frivolous and lightweight. Still, for all the skill with which it is written, this story is both tragic and depressing (the book does a good job of making you realise the difference between the two). It's telling that while it concludes on the promise of hope, it's only a promise: an actual happy ending would feel grotesquely inappropriate. Not without its strengths, but a tough read in many ways - other apocalypses are much more fun.