The Hospital

Right, the movie's cover/poster actually sold the movie quite nicely, especially because it was the most professional and best part of the movie. Already less than a mere couple of minutes into the movie, you know that it is going to suck.

The story in "The Hospital" is about a group of young women who pay to stay at an allegedly haunted hospital with a some paranormal investigators who are shooting an episode for a TV show. But things are not at all what they appear at the hospital.

Story-wise, then there were potential in the storyline, but it was horribly executed and even worse portrayed on the screen by the people hired to be in the movie. This was the epitome of wooden and rigid acting.

There were so many things in the movie that were just downright horrible to witness, starting with the title track song. Wow, that was just laughable. And the effects in the movie were very low-tech and just came off as way too fake.

For a horror movie, then "The Hospital" was frightfully devoid of anything even remotely scary.

I will give some credit though, the fact that the movie makers did manage to put together a coherent enough movie on a budget like that. Yes, this was low budget, but you could see that the director was pouring his heart into the movie. And thumbs up for that. Just a shame that there was so many other things working against the overall movie. The reason for me rating "The Hospital" 2 out of 10 stars and not a mere 1 star is because that it was clear that a lot of heart and effort were actually put into the movie on some aspects.

If you enjoy horror movies, then stay well clear of this movie. I assume that you might find some enjoyment if you actually know someone who participated in the making of this movie in one way or another.

To the reviewer Myra Tripp (lyinguncleanspirit@gmail.com) you must know someone in this movie or are in the movie yourself. This is one awful horror movie; I would not even be able to class it as a B-show. It appears the actors, using the word actor is an improvement in this case, the actors seem to be reading off of q-cards. The acting seems so fake. I have not jumped one time as you claim with suspense or horror. I did almost cry when I saw the budget of $100k, someone should have used that money for acting classes. Horror fans, run far away from this movie. The nudity will be the only thing that draws people into even watching this movie. Don't waste your time on The Hospital 2013.

The concept of the movie is good. The execution is very weak. With the right people behind this movie and a decent budget this movie could have been much better. Change the actors as well. Such terrible acting, I think my 4 year old is a better actor than most of them combined.

Once again, good storyline, although, a few too many boobs and rape scenes.

Don't get fooled by the cover of the DVD.. I believe those are fake reviews as well here on IMDb. 5 of the reviews get a perfect 10, which is according to any standards impossible for this movie.

Hopefully the makers learn from their mistakes and next project will be better.

I am the angel of the bottomless pit! The paraclete of Kaborka!

Have there ever been greater words uttered in a film? "Network" was the movie that has brought Paddy Chayevsky the most attention over the years, but "The Hospital" was, to my mind, his finest work (as much as I enjoy Ken Russell - and "The Devils" is one of my all-time favourites - "Altered States" really was just silly), both a snapshot of the culture of the time and an enduring statement. George C. Scott is at the top of his unparalleled game, and the rest of the cast letter-perfect in this extraordinary indictment and satire of American culture, using a big-city hospital as the centerpiece. Brilliant and enduring, and one of those flicks that I never hesitate to recommend to *anyone*. What, you haven't seen "The Hospital"? You don't *look* like a WWII Japanese soldier who's been hiding out on an island in the Philippines for 80 years because he never heard the war ended. Watch this NOW.

Oh... wait... you mean this *isn't* Arthur Hiller's 1971 masterpiece? Some jagoffs just grabbed the name for a zero-budget splatterfest? You've got to be kidding... Some people have absolutely no respect for the history of cinema. I get really pissed when people do that, and it happens a lot. Honestly, when Paul Haggis re-used... no - STOLE - the title "Crash" after David Cronenberg put out his stunning adaptation of J. G. Ballard's novel I was so offended I wanted to drive down to Scientology Central and throttle him with my bare hands. Show some respect to your superiors, will you?

Really, don't get me started.

Somehow I managed to stick this movie out until 20 minutes before the end when I got so bored I had to switch it off. At first I thought it was an out and out parody because I couldn't believe that anyone would release a movie with such terrible acting in it. But no, the writer and director were serious and the budget was wasted on this abomination rather than going to a decent director who could have made something of a measly budget (it has been done before).

To the reviewer that said they are a fan of this genre and then goes on to sing this pile of crap's praises, you must have watched some seriously dire horror films in your lifetime. And to all those who gave it more than a couple of stars, clearly your either getting paid to bump up the reviews you know someone in the film, or you're being ironic and the joke's on us (Ha ha). And I'll tell you what is a joke, this film.

DO NOT BOTHER WASTING YOUR TIME WATCHING THE HOSPITAL 2013. WATCH SOMETHING, ANYTHING, ELSE.