Movie Appraisal: Infection (Kansen) (感染) (2004)

"But he... He gets inside."

The best way to describe Infection is to call it a psychological horror mindscrew of a movie. I don't even know if the story is coherent enough to truly understand. It seems to be more focused on symbolism and interesting imagery than an actual plot. But I think that's also the point. I think it's an interesting movie, but one that is so utterly jumbled that sometimes it's more difficult to follow the psychology of the plot than just following the horror of it. As the first J-Horror Theater movie, this one is very good, giving the six movie "series" a great start. Director Masayuki Ochiai does a great job with directing, but his editor should be barred from ever editing again. It's a mess, seriously.

I went into this movie thinking it would be gory and awful to watch. I literally had to anticipate the gore effects that I really thought would be highlighting this movie, for better or worse. But this movie has very few truly gory moments to it, more lingering on characters' reactions to the offscreen gore than actual shots of gore. This is probably for budgetary reasons rather than artistic choice, but it worked well in my opinion, leaving more to the imagination and less to the eye, something that I always find effective.

Like Into the Mirror, this movie also has a focus on mirrors, to the point that this movie could have taken that movie's title and nobody would have known. I guess the idea here is that mirrors either tell the truth or give way to some alternate reality where guilt and conscience rule. And green blood. For reasons. I can't really understand the entirety of the plot or the point that they were trying to make. Sometimes these types of movies put symbolism for symbolism's sake into their movies. That could be the case here. I don't really know.

Anyway, Infection takes place at a hospital, following around a collection of nurses and doctors who are on a night shift. The hospital is overrun with patients (even though we only ever see a handful of them) and is financially sinking. Most of the first part of this movie is a medical drama unfolding, seeing how stressed these doctors and nurses are, seeing how difficult their work is, and seeing how exhaustion and the stress can lead to bad decision making.

A burned man falls from his bed, dies, is brought back to life, and then through medical error dies again, this time for good. The acting in this scene is excellent, as the doctors' both try to save one of their own by hiding the evidence of the error and bullying the nurses into accepting what they want to do to hide it. It's effective and eerie, with the whole scene playing out as if it could be pure comedy or pure sickening horror. Sometimes these things are difficult to pin down.

Throughout the beginning part of the movie, we are also treated to a collection of small scenes detailing an ambulance talking about a man with some kind of infectious disease that they found. These paramedics come into the hospital seeking help for the infected victim. Dr. Akiba, who is sort of the main character of the movie and the doctor who admitted error with the burn victim (in the scene after this), turns them away, which will have dire consequences on the rest of the movie. Again, burn victim dies from medical error, and then the chief nurse goes down to check the ER, only to find the infectious disease victim still there, the ambulance gone.

This is when the movie gets strange. Dr. Akai, the director of the hospital, has a collection of scenes being very adamant about studying the disease. His scenes are shocking in a way because of the way he acts. He is always stone-faced (except once), and he is filmed with some kind of filter, a green one, I believe, that leaves him looking washed-out and creepy. The victims organs are shown to be liquefying as well, but the person is still very much alive and coherent, even smiling at the doctors.

The movie rushes on, now being both confusing and disjointed, showing more a focus on horror than story. The nurse, four of them, die horrifically one-by-one, each taken out by the green infection starting from the chief nurse getting infected by the initial victim (whose body disappears) to each one of the others getting infected by one another, I believe. Parts of this movie can be confusing, which is why I'm kind of wondering myself what happened at times. Eventually, Dr. Uozumi, one of the lead characters, is also infected, and shown speaking to a person he had once killed accidentally. This incident cements the meaning of this movie and the infection to basically being something like guilt.

Dr. Akiba is told from the dead Akai (because Akai was the burn victim all along) that the infection is transmitted through the subconscious mind rather than through the air or by touch. This means that they were all infected in turn by the guilt they felt over the death of the patient or the way they treated someone else or how they screwed up medically once. Over this whole part of the film, and maybe I didn't catch every instance of this, but what it seems like is that the movie has the green film over it at times, showing some kind of alternate world... maybe even the mirror world where ghosts are still living as the old woman patient seems to imply many times.

The psychological elements show up near the end, as Dr. Akiba looks through a mirror and sees his blood as green blood, rather than the red blood he has in real life. And as a female doctor enters the hospital in the morning light, the awful truth is learned. The doctors and the nurses are all dead, no longer with the green blood and bile, but rather with red blood covering them, obviously killed by someone. Akiba (and the Pediatrician who wants to be a surgeon) are guilty of the crimes (at least in the eyes of the law).

And the film ends with the insanity of the final female doctor, Dr. Nakazono, after she signs off a boy from the beginning of the movie whose brain was bleeding, thus showing her the green blood world and her own infection. And then the boy with the fox mask shows up again, probably implying something with him, although I have no idea what. As an added thing, Akai, in Japanese, means red. Which probably has some meaning. Perhaps Dr. Akai was never real, more an implied person standing in for the real world or the infection. The final scene is Dr. Akiba, shut in the locker that kept opening earlier in the movie in the room they were trying to speed-decay the burn victim's corpse. His arm falls off with green blood attached. He is fully infected.

As a last point, there are some seriously scary moments to this movie, particularly the background scares that linger. Some of those moments were great visuals and left an impact on me. It will be hard to forget that chief nurse standing on the cot in the background of a single shot, her face as white as paper, knowing what will come next, and being unable to do a thing about it. Great direction all around, really showcasing the horrific elements of the story.

Oh man. This movie is both complex and very confusing at times. There are a great many details throughout the film, the blink-and-you'll-miss-them type of details. Honestly, this is a movie where a second viewing might be required just being of the complexity of detail. I would say that infection is all about guilt and that the infection attacks the guilty part of one's mind. Beyond that, I have no idea what this movie is. It's an effective horror movie, one with really bad editing, but great cinematography and direction. The acting is perfectly fine, although I wouldn't say anybody was particularly awesome in their role. It's a movie I would recommend as a horror movie for J-Horror fans. This movie is certainly not for everybody though, and I feel that to some it might be more frustrating and confusing than frightening. I liked it quite a bit, but also feel that it is far from perfect, particularly in its disjointed nature and focus on nothing at times. Check it out if you want an interesting little Japanese Horror movie. Just remember that it's all over the place in quality.

Movie Appraisal: The Deaths of Ian Stone (2007)

The Deaths of Ian Stone surprised me. I was honestly not expecting to like this movie very much. Sad, but true. I don't like being biased against films when watching them, but I was certainly biased against this one. Maybe it was because the main character's name is Ian Stone and he looks like the exact opposite of any person I could ever even hope to like. He looks like a prick. Boy does he look like prick. Maybe it's because from the way the film was shot I really expected to find myself making fun of the movie rather than enjoying it... but... BUT!!!!!

I liked it a lot. I really thought that it was a breath of fresh air when compared to some of the Japanese horror movies I've been watching lately. Say what you will about Western Horror as a genre (and I certainly have a lot to say about it) but when it works it really does work. Now, part of it is that things actually happen in this film. It's not all about a slow buildup with little to no payoff. No, this has the gore, the excitement, the thrills, and I couldn't have been happier. It blew me away with a lot more of everything than I ever would have expected.

Now, admittedly, I have a pretty huge tolerance for bad films, but I really didn't think this was a bad film, more like it was very similar to other films and... enjoyable despite everything it had going against it. That's the keyword here: enjoyable. This movie was fun to watch, which is quite the compliment when most movies I watch are either boring, predictable, or just plain rubbish... or just so mediocre that I can't even really find insults to throw at them. The Deaths of Ian Stone was not predictable. It had a plot. It was a weird plot, granted, but it was a plot that moved and existed. It had characters that were meaningful and even felt real at times. It even had horror movie THINGS in it! It was even a little disturbing and creepy for a few seconds! I couldn't imagine giving the film more stellar praise than that! Dario Piana directed a film which actually is kind of a horror movie! YEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!

I kid.

No, seriously, I'm not kidding at all. I've been watching Japanese horror or fairly bland horror movies for the better part of two months at the moment of writing this review, and this is really a breath of fresh air (Well, this movie and They Live! but that movie is already one of the best films ever made, so... yeah.).

Is this a great movie? No, but it works as both a horror movie and a narrative. The characters are surprisingly well executed. The actors do a fantastic job. The visuals are pretty well done too. I mean, I do have some complaints, but this is such a competent film that does what it attempts to do very well. So, first off, I recommend it even if it isn't your style. As long as you enjoy kind of stupid horror with a plot, you'll probably like this well enough.

Now, what style is the film? Well, it's an odd mash-up. I was thinking a very dark The Truman Show for about half of the movie. It also reminds me of a horror version of The Matrix, or maybe more fittingly, an actually engaging Dark City. Look, I hate Dark City by the way, and The Deaths of Ian Stone actually is so much better than Dark City that Dark City should be incredibly embarrassed with itself for being one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The Deaths of Ian Stone has basically a similar plot to Dark City, but its flow, its characters, its everything is so much better. I mean, Dark City infuriated me, making me feel almost idiotic for not liking it. I felt like it was talking down to me, and I can't stand that. It was a movie I should have loved. Noir mixed with horror mixed with intelligent thought and weird occurrences? Yeah, I should have liked that... but when the first vampire thing showed up the movie just lost me... The Deaths of Ian Stone, on the other hand, drew me in enough before its (odd, but strangely interesting) reveal that I actually enjoyed the reveal. It was well set-up, well executed, and well done in general. That's more than I will ever say about freaking Dark City.

So, there are these "Harvesters" and they feed on fear and pain and death and such. Okay, it sounds like those blighters from Harry Potter, the Dementers from the prison, but I have an inkling the idea of these things existed long before Harry Potter did. I didn't really like the visual design for the Harvesters, but I liked how they were introduced and executed. It was well done and I have no real complaints about their existence. At least the world wasn't actually on a rock floating in goddamn space...

Sorry, I'm still bitter...

Anyway, the movie is basically what it says on the tin: dude named Ian Stone dies a lot. Bam. We're done here. Let's pack it up and go home. That's a show.

Okay... all right... I guess I'm not done yet. Let me compose myself a little here. Thoughts of Dark City have made me grumpy.

Okay, well this dude named Ian Stone (played very well by Mike Vogel), who is an American living in Britain, goes through various lives and scenarios basically each day, dying through each life and also seeing the same group of people in each life and each day. As he finds himself in more and more lives he starts remembering the previous lives. (At the beginning of the movie he doesn't remember his previous lives immediately upon waking up with a new life. Later on he basically remembers everything right away.) Ian is a little confused by the whole thing and through the story we learn that he is to be killed by the Harvesters because of a memory he has within him. It's confusing, but is presented pretty well in the movie. It gets confusing at first, but then you remember the name of the movie and it gets a little clearer.

At the same time a girl named Jenny (played by Christina Cole) seems to hold the key to Ian's deaths and new lives while an odd older gentleman (played by Michael Feast) keeps showing up to tell Ian about what's going on. These stories converge when the gentleman, called "Gray," tells Ian that Ian himself is a Harvester, but no longer relies on pain, fear, or death because he fell in love, much like Gray did before. And Ian, the big softy, fell in love with Jenny, the girl who keeps showing up in his life, the girl who he keeps close to him in his various lives.

All throughout these odd revelations, a very creepy seductress Harvester named Medea (played by Jaime Murray) keeps trying to kill Ian... or at least make his life a living hell. Ian and Medea had a thing or something back in the day and she's a clingy broad and can't let go. Well, that and she's a little on the loony side. The chick is easily the scariest thing in the movie. Her expressions change so quickly that I'm surprised she doesn't get whiplash. She acts in such a way that her conviction is kind of as terrifying as her methods. I mean, the woman plays a great villain. I didn't expect that when first seeing the movie, but damn. DAMN. That's all I'll say on the matter.

The movie ends with the revelation that Ian killed an unkillable Harvester, and then he proceeds to hunt the rest of them down because that's how he rolls. The creepiness goes right out the window at that point, but I had a fun time watching him kill everybody, so I didn't mind so much.

I also enjoyed his demon Fabio hair. Human Ian has close cut hair. Harvester Ian has wonderful Fabio hair. I loved it. I loved that Fabio hair so much. I had such a question mark above my head when I saw it there, swaying to some unseen breeze like he was about to seduce everybody in the room with his ugly mug. I mean, how can you say no to hair like:

THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh my... Ian Stone, you are a sexy man. Please, take me now. TAKE EVERYONE NOW.

Seriously. There has to either be some sort of sense of humor here or a rather large oversight in this HORROR MOVIE. I shouldn't have been laughing. I shouldn't have been laughing so hard that I couldn't breath. I shouldn't have been crying with laughter to his Fabio hair. My vision was turning red. I was losing oxygen because I thought Fabio Harvester here was the funniest thing I think I've ever actually seen in a horror movie, especially a horror movie that was pretty good. I mean, even with this rather... insanely amusing image that's never leaving my head... seducing me in my weirdest and most awful nightmares... I still liked the movie. It was just an odd... no, no... more than odd... baffling design choice. Look at his puckered lips... those soft eyes locked so far into his head... and then his beautiful hair. I don't even know what things are anymore. Why do movies do this to me? Why do they make me feel like I've lost my own mind? I'm not imagining how funny this is, right? I mean, this is actually really, really, hilarious... I think? I don't want to be the only one laughing my brains out of my skull while everybody else just kind of stares at me while I giggle about corpse Fabio seducing the dead. Oh boy, I need to stop. I think I need a long rest...

Despite the rather... awful decision that Fabioed inside of my head, the movie was pretty good, often very enjoyable. I liked the atmosphere, the acting, even the horror... though the horror was few and far between. There were some thrills though and some gore, all of which were well done. The suspense is very well executed, and I found myself more than once wondering what would happen next. The movie wasn't predictable in the slightest, and that might be the best part about it. I did find that there seemed to be a few instances of really bad CGI though, mostly with the Harvester eyes, but it only occurred a few times and only irked me slightly.

Anyway, the movie has an effective use of shadows, even if it does turn less effective as the movie progresses. It feels like a horror movie especially in the beginning. It's never really scary though, except with Medea. She actually was quite the good terrifying villain. I would not want to deal with a chick like her. I mean, seriously, when she starts going at Ian, saying she doesn't enjoy hurting or killing him, I'm thinking, "Uh-huh... tell me another one, lady. You're definitely enjoying it a little with a smile like that on your face." Because of her and her alone the hospital scene is probably the most uncomfortable and real in the entire film. It is also probably my favorite scene. Easily the scariest and it does start getting pretty good and really meta in there, which I always enjoy. I don't understand why the evil characters get all Matrixed out in sunglasses and leather, but I rolled with it despite being confused and a little weirded out (I don't like The Matrix even slightly and found the design decision odd to say the least.). Medea looked good enough in red leather that I wasn't about to complain even though I kind of wanted to complain.

Anyway, I liked this one. Even if it isn't the best movie it made an impression on me. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, even Ian Stone's long flowing Harvester hair... no, especially Ian Stone's long flowing sexy Fabio hair. It's a movie I recommend, but realize that it's rough enough around the edges that some people may dislike it. I mean, I went into this expecting the worst, and I could certainly see other people getting the worst out of it, so take my recommendation with a fickle bit of doubt spread into your head. So... yeah. It was much better than absolutely awful which translates to me actually liking it quite a bit.

Movie Appraisal: Autopsy (2008)

Generic horror movie, how many ways can you be seen? Set in a remote place, having bland character archetypes, inane and insufferable dialogue, and flashy moving pictures full of blood, blood, and more blood how can you be anything but a generic horror movie? Yes, you have a set-piece in a creepy hospital, but how many other, better, movies, can say the same?

This... this is the kind of movie I abhor. One with gimmicky visuals and not much else. The plot is... uh... plot? It seems to be set in a fantasy world wholly unlike our own, where things like hitting a dude with a car doesn't matter and entities like the police do not work like the police should. How does an ambulance respond within moments of an accident? And how do these people not notice they've hit a dude? That's nonsensical, weird, and not true to life.

This movie also shows me that the character archetype that I most like is the douchebag stoner type. That should not be the case. I am not a stoner and my douchebag qualities are debatable. So, there's that. What? What is this movie supposed to be telling me? What is it supposed to be saying? Why did I watch this? Why? Why? Why?

I guess I'm not quite sure why this movie was made. It's derivative at absolute best. It's not scary, not really well-paced or plotted. It seems to actively make fun of itself at points which is absolutely freaking hilarious... not. There were WAAAAAAAY too many moments of me going "What. What? WHAT? WHAT!?" I don't think I'm ever supposed to say that many "whats" in a single thought-process. Science does not work the way this movie presents science as working.

I need a break. I need to stop ranting. This movie is so... so... so... full of nothing. Why would anybody like it? Who's the audience of a movie like this? Hardcore horror fans? Gore-fest freaks? I guess. I can't imagine anybody else being fond of it. The plot is too convoluted. the characters are too one-dimensional. Nobody is real here. Now, I know, I'm not asking for Hamlet here or even The Lord of the Rings. I'm simply asking for good science and character's that seem like they could be real and not just convenient for a slasher film. I only want a horror movie to have horror in it. That's seriously all I really want. I want to be scared of a film that calls itself a horror film. If it isn't going to scare me or at the very least unnerve me, it can't be a horror film.

This is a gore-fest and it's kind of dumb. Yes, this movie is stupid. But I will admit it does have its moments of sheer ballsy entertainment. As hard as it was to suspend my disbelief, I found some of the dialogue sort of witty in a way at times and Robert Patrick was pretty freaking awesome. The guy can certainly act I'll give him that much. Some of my reactions to the actual movie amused me so much more than the actual movie. This is basically the perfect movie to watch with a bunch of friends and make fun of the whole damn thing.

I will admit that it does have two of the best "Oh crap..." moments I have ever seen though, which I think is worth something even though both seemed more deus ex machina moments that were convenient to the plot rather than intelligent and well-construed occurrences.

I have learned from this movie to never mess with a 100 pound woman who has no formal training in anything. 'Cause according to this movie they will ruin everything in search of bland boyfriends and revenge. I guess what I have an issue with here is that 100 pound women are not scary. They do not bring the deepest of all dreads out of my heart. They do not make me scream in terror when they approach. And I think that's an issue when the single most terrifying character in this film is not the ex-cons, the insane doctor, or the creepy nurse, but rather a 100 pound young woman who seems to single-handedly ruin everybody.

The visuals are all right, I guess, but they seem to rely way to much on the dusky corridors and red lighting, or dim lighting at times. Makes me think they were trying a little too hard to show, "Oh, look, we're in Hell!" I wasn't fond of it.

The movie as a whole was mediocre, but not terrible. I could complain all day and all night and nitpick and everything else. The movie was mostly bad, but it did have its moments and they actually did seem to work kind of decently at points. The problem was the problem in so much horror today. All of the focus was on getting out of the hospital or getting away from the situation or trying to find a person and all it really seemed like to me was two hours of corridor wandering and getting caught a bunch of times by the same four evil characters. It became boring half-way through and a horror movie should be many things, but it should never be boring.

Movie Appraisal: Dark Floors (2008)

Well, I just saw this movie, Dark Floors, and I... well, I can honestly say that it was certainly a movie... a short movie, sure, but a movie  nonetheless. As for everything else... hmmm... I hate saying that I went into watching this movie having a bad feeling about it, but... I kind of did.

Now, this certainly wasn't the worst movie of this type I have ever seen. Sublime, The I Inside, or Autopsy would be among the worst of this genre... this psychological horror-esque weird kind of genre that really isn't anything at all but generic kind of horror. Honestly, I'm probably more forgiving with The I Inside than the other two simply because it was kind of a different formula even if it wasn't very good.

And Dark Floors is kind of different, I guess... especially if you've never seen another horror movie in your life before. I tire of predicting the scares, the shots, the scream chords, the deaths, and in what order those deaths occur. I mean, yes, they certainly tried to make it suspenseful, and maybe they would have succeeded if not for me being the jaded and cynical viewer of horror that I am today. No, I have to disagree with myself. The suspense was... not great. It was kind of all over the place and I was lost.

No, I wasn't lost because it was SOOOOOOO DEEP, or because too much was happening. I was lost because the director obviously seemed to have no real idea what was going on. What was going on? I certainly don't have a clue. It seemed like there were monsters pursuing a bunch of people who got trapped in an elevator and were transported to a cross between Silent Hill  and "The Langoliers" (That's not a reference I make very often, so everybody should pat me on the back for that one.). Now, I like Silent Hill, and "The Langoliers" is pretty good. Hell, I even enjoyed the TV movie of it and not many can say that without being slapped upside the head. But I like my Stephen King and the novella was really good especially for him during that time period of his writing.

Anywho, that's kind of what I thought about the movie. It was a cross between Silent Hill with the corruption, the monsters, the zombies, the punishments... all of that stuff... and "The Langoliers" because of all of the time stuff. I had guessed it long before it was revealed and I was all like, Stephen King does know that you ripped off his idea, right?

This movie is such a generic horror movie. Oh, it certainly tries to be psychological, but... seriously? Come on. No, really, come on. This is not psychological. This is not scary. Suspenseful maybe if you like the characters, but... characters? Look, this is the most generic horror movie setting I have ever seen: a hospital. Wow, I've never seen that before. I'm shaking in my boots at being in a hospital. It's as if I've never seen one before. Stupid. Look, try something new. Look at The Other Side of the Tracks. Seriously. Look at that movie. No, it wasn't quite horrific, but it was extremely effective. It did something I have rarely seen, and it did it really well... well enough that I want to watch it all again. It surprised me and it wowed me. the directing was fantastic, but Dark Floors was just... generic. I cut copy-and-paste it with any other cheaper horror movie made today. Not that they're all bad, but this one was so obviously generic that it's basically my tagline for this movie.

Dark Floors: "So you want to see the most generic horror movie of all time? Well, here it is, you brats. I hope you enjoy it."

Oh, and the freaking little girl. Seriously? Haven't I ranted and raved about this enough? Little girls are not scary, not in any context. Maybe... MAYBE... in The Ring, but that was effective in many more ways than just a creepy little girl. It was a fully packed psychological horror movie without being in some fantasy realm or inside of somebody's mind. It was incredibly effective and beautiful. But the rule of thumb is still that little girls are not scary. If I can punt the scary symbol of the movie like a basketball, then that thing is not scary. Yes, I know, the girl wasn't the antagonist of this particular movie, but the director tried incredibly hard to make her into the creepy little girl trope and nobody could ever convince me otherwise. And it didn't work! She was not scary or creepy, she was just bad at acting (Sorry, little girl, but you're still young, you'll get there eventually... and I don't think it was your fault anyway. I really blame the director.). Okay, now that I have talked to the young actress of this movie who will never ever in a million years read this review, let's move on.

The acting in general is... not wonderful, which hurts this movie even further. Some of the characters get by on a singular one-dimensional characteristic, like the nurse being cute and innocent, or the mean and angry man (see also "The Langoliers") being both mean and angry, and acting as a general jerk to everybody around him. Then there's the big guy who also appears to be black... and of course, of course, he's the first one that "dies." Oh, and there's the crazy old and wise guy. He's crazy, old, and wise! And the main everyman man... who represents every man! These characters are so generic that they should have names like "Meany-pants", "Old Wise Guy", "Everyman", "Cute Nurse", "Creepy Little Girl", "Black Tough Guy Who Sacrifices Himself Early In The Movie". Ugh... the writing is bad, the characters are cheap, and... well... that's all I have to say about that.

Some good things I should mention are that the sounds are pretty good even if the acting isn't fantastic. They did do a really good job with ambient noise and music. I was impressed at points, even if the acting couldn't hold it up. Also, the make-up and scene effects were pretty decent too, even if I had trouble telling exactly what some people in make-up were supposed to be besides generic monster-things.

There were so many cheap little scares and it was so predictable. It was actually starting to bore me a lot. I actually had to stop the movie at one point because I was predicting everything that was going on and was starting to fall asleep from literal boredom.

Also, I suppose I should also mention that the band Lordi, who I'd never heard of before this film, were the ones not only playing the monsters, but were also the ones that really wanted to make their own horror film. The subtitle for this film is usually The Lordi Motion Picture. I guess if you like horror movies, you should make your very own. I guess that's a thing now. Oh, and this film is a Finnish film as well, but nowhere near as good as the last Finnish film that I saw: Sauna: Wash Your Sins.

I mean, I guess the movie was all right. I can't recommend it. In my obviously professional opinion, this is not a movie that is good enough to recommend. The tension in the movie can be pretty good at times though. I wasn't exactly impressed, but it was better than I would have expected.

Movie Appraisal: Session 9 (2001)

Session 9 is a fantastic psychological horror movie. This is exactly what every psychological horror movie should be. Yes, it takes credit from the location of the abandoned Danvers State Hospital, but the imagery overall is fantastic.Yes, there are some downsides, but with the relatively tiny amounts of good or even decent psychological horror movies out there, this movie does stand out to me as being absolutely full of quality.

While neither the acting nor the characters themselves really sell this movie, the directing and mental hospital imagery really do. What is scary than being inside of an abandoned mental asylum? Not much. What else can I even think of that would be scarier? Locked inside of the Parisian catacombs? Or I guess any catacombs? Yeah, I guess that would be more terrifying, but until I see horror movies with that as the setting, I am going to have to settle for this being one of the creepier settings.

A lot of psychological horror is set in hospitals, probably to remind all the viewers of death and how hospitals really are a place of sickness and death just as much as they are places of healing. It is how our society views death. We fear hospitals for what they represent: death, sickness, disease, cancer, sadness, grief... All those things come to mind when thinking about a hospital, and a mental hospital is even worse, throwing in insanity and psychosis into the mix, maybe even violence if there is a history of that with the patients.

My point here is that a lot of psychological horror tends to use that fear of hospitals against the viewer. Hospitals or mental hospitals appear in Jacob's Ladder, Autopsy, Room 8, Silent Hill, Ink, Stay, Black damn Swan, The Ring, Dead End, Sublime, 1408, and many others including many horror video games as well. My point is that the setting is used so much because it is useful for unsettling the watcher and useful for making people squirm. That is one of the reasons why Session 9 is so effective.

Is it my favorite psychological horror movie? No. It has its moments, but ultimately, despite the great and fearful visuals, it seems to lack something. The plot is simplistic, about working men cleaning up an old hospital and finding something dark within that place. Yes, there are small scares from time to time, but nothing that feels altogether coherent. It has a weird plot, one that turns about and has a big twist in the end, but ultimately feels like it lacks a soul.

Does it really matter if a horror movie has a soul or not?

No, I think this movie feels scary. There are scenes in this film that are intensely difficult to watch. One comes to mind with the use of the lobotomizing instrument. It's really creepy.

The plot is all over the place and, like I said previously, involves a few twists and turns with an ultimate story "twist." I'm not going to spoil it, but it involves Dissociative Identity Disorder (DID), which seems to be a common thing in psychological horror (like Identity for example) and a loose cannon of a character. The pacing is good and the characters, although not exactly likable or played by amazing actors, do a great job for their roles within the story.

There are some Chekhov's guns throughout the story as well and if you pay attention you can figure out the plot long before the movie presents the solution to you. Watch the phone calls between Gordon and his wife, watch the different deaths of the cast and see if you can figure it out. The character of Simon is also creepy too, creepy enough to give one of my friends who watched it years ago nightmares about it for weeks afterward.

Again, this is a solid entry into psychological horror even if it isn't the best. It's scary and well-paced, and thoroughly enjoyable, with few flaws that I can really even mention save the weak cast. The imagery is incredibly well done and it really does stick out as one of the better psychological horror movies around even if it really jumps onto an overdone psychological horror trope in using hospitals as a main setting. It's a solid movie anyway and lovers or even likers of psychological movies or horror movies will be impressed by it.