Psych:9

A film about a young woman working in an abandoned hospital...zzz...are you still awake? Yep, we're back in the world of creepy abandoned buildings, ghosts caught on CCTV cameras, long corridors with poor lighting and unexplained noises coming from empty rooms. PSYCH 9 is one of those would-be horror films that ploughs entirely familiar turf.

The movie attempts to take a psychological approach to the material, but the derivative script combined with poor film-making skills results in a highly painful viewing experience. There are long, endless shots thrown in in a bid to establish mood but which do little other than test the viewer's endurance.

Throw in some by now perfunctionary flashbacks, clichéd jittery editing shots and a bunch of tired, has-been actors (Colleen Camp, Cary Elwes and an entirely superfluous Michael Biehn) and you have a recipe for disaster. Sara Foster's cold and unsympathetic lead is the final straw.

I don't know what's worse about the ending: that the script is so poor I wasn't who sure who the murderer was, or that by this point I had no interest in finding out.

Psych:9 (2010)

3 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 2:05 min

BASIC PLOT: Roslyn (Sara Foster) is starting a new job at a hospital that's closing down. She's going through, and transferring medical records, as part of the closure. There's only two other people on the grounds, Dr. Irvin Clement (Cary Elwes), who's upstairs, doing the same job, in the psych unit, and a creepy security guard (Ryan James), in a shack out front.

At the same time, a serial killer known as "the Night Hawk", has been killing blonde women all over town.

Detective Marling (Michael Biehn), has been assigned the Night Hawk case, and appears to have suspicions about the identity of the killer.

Cole (Gabriel Mann) is Rosyln's husband, who drives a cab.

There's not much of a story, just a bunch of characters, bumbling around in an old hospital.

WHAT WORKS: *AWESOME OPENING SEQUENCE There's a cool opening, using Rorschach ink blots, with faces in them. It's the best part of the whole movie.

*GREAT ATMOSPHERIC The setting was coming through the screen, and the feeling of it was awful! I don't know if it was a set, or an actual building, but it had an ominous aura. The location was disturbing, and it got to you. It really added to the ambience of the movie.

*THE LIGHTERS ARE A GOOD VISUAL METAPHOR They let you know fire is important, a metaphor for history, insanity and cleansing.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *I HATE THESE WOMEN who marry children, nag them, gripe about them, and then are surprised when they cheat, or act a fool. This is a personal preference, but I hate these types of relationships in movies and on TV. You knew he was an idiot when you married him, don't gripe about it.

*THE GREEN FILTER IS DISTRACTING l know they are going for an industrial feel, but it's too much. It takes away from the amazing visuals the filming location provides, and that's about all this movie has going for it.

*MICHAEL BIEHN IS WASTED IN THIS MOVIE Michael Biehn, who plays Detective Marling, is wasted here. His character is pointless, goes nowhere, and it feels like he was cast, just so his name could be on the credits (his name made me watch). This flawed script throws his character away, and it's such a shame. When he's on the screen, he steals the show.

*THERE'S NO STORY There tries to be one, but it makes no sense. There was something about childhood sexual abuse, crazy parents, paranoia, and a baby. That's about all I got from this movie. It's not engaging, or even interesting, and certainly NOT entertaining. There are lots of disturbing shots of a disused hospital, but even that is destroyed by the overuse of the green filter.

Several different renderings could have been chosen to advance the story, but instead, there are just more missed opportunities. We could have seen through the disturbed person's eyes, this technique was attempted (I think), but it's so jumbled, it doesn't work. A depiction of that nature works, only when you have a stable, grounding character, that represents reality. Detective Marling (Michael Biehn) should have been given this role, but instead, he's only given a few minutes of screen time. Without that grounding influence, all you're left with is a haphazard melange of disjointed imagery, and ideas. The viewer cannot tell delusion from reality, so no story forms into anything resembling a cohesive plot

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *The film ventures into strange territory with its attempts at allegories and symbolism, but these efforts lead nowhere, and fail to provide a clear point. It had good actors, who were wasted. It had a cool location, that was wasted. The interesting opening was about all this movie had to offer. I'd skip it, there are better creepy atmospherics out there. Try Session 9 (2001) instead.

CLOSING NOTES: *I HAVE NO CONNECTION TO THE FILM, or production in ANY way. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.

A young girl gets a night job at an abandoned hospital doing clerical work. She's not alone though, there is another man on level 5 doing similar work. The woman starts to get visions of creepy things in the hospital, which slowly makes her lose her mind. It doesn't help that there is also a serial killer deemed The Night Hawk roaming the streets outside.

Psych 9 goes in too many directions and none of them come to a cohesive ending. Too much is left up being ambiguous and the film asks way too much from the audience. Big plot questions are never answered and we are left to assume things. Psych 9 doesn't know what type of film it wants to be, it's a slasher film at one point, then a supernatural spook story the next. The story should have concentrated on one aspect and stuck with it.

Sara Foster plays Roslyn, the young woman who gets the new job. She hears and sees things that a creepy, this takes a toll on her. She begins to go a tad crazy and we get to know a bit more about her past. Foster does a good job here, she has quite a bit of depth to her character, more than you would expect from a film like this. Her character is a lot like Nina from the recent Black Swan. The man up on the 5th floor is Dr. Irvin Clement played by Cary Elwes. His two most famous roles are Dr. Lawrence Gordon from Saw and more memorably Westley from The Princess Bride. he mostly sits and chats up Foster in this role, nothing too challenging or memorable to comment on.

There is a detective after Night Hawk, played by the always reliable and awesome 24/7 Michael Biehn. Again, underused a bit, his scenes consist of him showing up, asking questions and then leaving. The memorable role here belongs to Foster and the creepy factor belongs to the hospital. Session 9 has some similar elements to this film and they pulled it off better. Here, it feels disjointed which leaves the viewer confused. I sure was at points and even still am.

A lot of the film has that "seen it before" vibe. Its cues are straight from other films. The confusing parts are the faults of the filmmakers, for either not knowing a definitive answer, or never having one. Parts of it feel incomplete and like two different movies. I would have liked them to have left the Night Hawk killer subplot at the door and concentrated the the hospital and how crazy Foster became. I sure as hell wouldn't work at that place at night.

Right from the start the makers of this movie succeed hands down in creating the perfect climate for a horror movie.

Outstanding camera work, lighting, set design, acting and direction all contribute to the unsettling atmosphere of a disturbed woman working alone at night in a deserted hospital with an unsavoury past.

Unfortunalty it goes on for much too long. After a while(of pretty much nothing happening) the silent halls and creaking lifts start to feel like home. You almost want to nip in and give her a hand with all that filing she is neglecting.

As the film trundles on I found myself willing something nasty to jump out and kill her or the coffee machine to run out of milk or anything of any note worthiness.

This is an excellently produced film, superbly executed and if you have a surplus of patience and don't expect any form of 'pay-off' this film may be for you; otherwise I'd check the rest of your DVD collection before sticking this one on.

The cast was very good, the cinematography fine, its the movie itself which is just poorly edited and convoluted. I know this sort of thing is en-vogue these days but give me a stylish Argento over this sort of thing any day. The flashback sequences do little to make the films point or establish any coherency to the story and the surprise ending should really be no surprise no matter how improbable. Film is a form of communication and the end product fails miserably in communicating anything at all. Again, kudos to a fine cast in spite of the material. Sets, lighting, atmosphere, cinematography a movie that would have had everything going for it in more capable hands.