Clinical
- 2017
- 1 घं 44 मि
IMDb रेटिंग
5.1/10
9.5 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA psychiatrist tries to put her life back together after a violent attack by seeking to repair the life of a new patient, but he has his own terrifying history.A psychiatrist tries to put her life back together after a violent attack by seeking to repair the life of a new patient, but he has his own terrifying history.A psychiatrist tries to put her life back together after a violent attack by seeking to repair the life of a new patient, but he has his own terrifying history.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I'll admit to being drawn into "Clinical" for its first 45 minutes. The plot, centering around a disillusioned psychiatrist reluctantly taking on a PTSD patient after her last go-around with an "intensive" client ended badly, offers up enough questions and mystique to lock you in. Then, somewhere around the hour mark, the film dives headfirst into a cheap plot twist that signals the film's narrative decline. The film dispenses with logic and heads into the rabbit hole, offering up a preposterous conclusion that destroys anything it previously had going for it. Twists in stories can often be used to wondrous effect, or they can derail your narrative into muck and make you wish the writer had played it straight. Often, you'll find it would have been a much better film had it dispensed with the shock factor and stuck to its guns. Such is the case with "Clinical."
I won't consider it a spoiler to say that, towards the end, things happen that beg a big "Huh?" from viewers. It's probably not a good sign for the writer when the character discovers a dead body and the viewer has to stop and ask themselves who the person is. Nor is the film in any way forthcoming about providing coherent answers to many of these questions. I'm not a lazy viewer. I don't demand a long, complicated piece of exposition to tell me everything, nor do I think all films should answer every question. But when so much of your story hinges on certain plot elements that you don't bother to fully elucidate in your narrative, the viewer can be left feeling a bit cheated. Much like the feeling one gets when a film ends before we see a proper conclusion to various plot threads that the writer has asked us to care about. Really, it's just not nice.
"Clinical" could have been something worthwhile, but ultimately the script lets the entire venture derail into frustrating ambiguity and lazy writing, offering up no compensation for the befuddled viewer who, by film's end, is left wondering why they even cared in the first place.
I won't consider it a spoiler to say that, towards the end, things happen that beg a big "Huh?" from viewers. It's probably not a good sign for the writer when the character discovers a dead body and the viewer has to stop and ask themselves who the person is. Nor is the film in any way forthcoming about providing coherent answers to many of these questions. I'm not a lazy viewer. I don't demand a long, complicated piece of exposition to tell me everything, nor do I think all films should answer every question. But when so much of your story hinges on certain plot elements that you don't bother to fully elucidate in your narrative, the viewer can be left feeling a bit cheated. Much like the feeling one gets when a film ends before we see a proper conclusion to various plot threads that the writer has asked us to care about. Really, it's just not nice.
"Clinical" could have been something worthwhile, but ultimately the script lets the entire venture derail into frustrating ambiguity and lazy writing, offering up no compensation for the befuddled viewer who, by film's end, is left wondering why they even cared in the first place.
It was a nice movie with a very bad ending part. Without the last 20 minutes it was good but with that end, i am sorry... Nothing more than 6
Clinical (2017): Since I watched Stranger Things,I became a huge fan of Netflix.I made a decision that i should never miss any series or movie that comes from Netflix.So,I watched Clinical with decent expectations as it is a psychological thriller,my favorite genre.So how is Clinical?
Plot: Clinical, tells the story of Dr. Jane Mathis (Vinessa Shaw), a psychiatrist who develops the symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after she is brutally attacked by one her patients; and subsequently witnesses the patient cut her own throat. She begins seeing a therapist to cope with her PTSD and is advised to stay away from emotionally intensive patients.But she meets a new patient with PTSD named Alex (Kevin Rahm),a man who suffered a horrible car accident and is severely disfigured.
Plus Points: 1)Performances: Vinessa Shaw is the only pro for this uneven thriller.It is her performance which makes us intrigued in this hollow film.She gave decent performance as a troubled psychiatrist.Kevin Rahm's look as disfigured face has good make up work.
2)Production Values: This movie has good production values which helped a lot to give a perfect locations and camera work.
3)Background Score: Background score is good at few scenes.
Minus Points: 1)Screenplay and Direction: Clinical is interesting for first 20 mins,but after that screenplay goes very slow and repetitive.The sessions between Alex and Mathis is so boring.It just gives a build up of giving a mind blowing twist but instead its gives a pretty lame predictable twist.
So,Clinical is a boring psychological thriller where the performance of lead actress is the only saving grace.
My rating 5/10
Plot: Clinical, tells the story of Dr. Jane Mathis (Vinessa Shaw), a psychiatrist who develops the symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after she is brutally attacked by one her patients; and subsequently witnesses the patient cut her own throat. She begins seeing a therapist to cope with her PTSD and is advised to stay away from emotionally intensive patients.But she meets a new patient with PTSD named Alex (Kevin Rahm),a man who suffered a horrible car accident and is severely disfigured.
Plus Points: 1)Performances: Vinessa Shaw is the only pro for this uneven thriller.It is her performance which makes us intrigued in this hollow film.She gave decent performance as a troubled psychiatrist.Kevin Rahm's look as disfigured face has good make up work.
2)Production Values: This movie has good production values which helped a lot to give a perfect locations and camera work.
3)Background Score: Background score is good at few scenes.
Minus Points: 1)Screenplay and Direction: Clinical is interesting for first 20 mins,but after that screenplay goes very slow and repetitive.The sessions between Alex and Mathis is so boring.It just gives a build up of giving a mind blowing twist but instead its gives a pretty lame predictable twist.
So,Clinical is a boring psychological thriller where the performance of lead actress is the only saving grace.
My rating 5/10
Every horror site I visited the last week(s) showed me the trailer of this netflix original. Netflix do make good series but for horror you don't have to go to them. Trailers did show some nasty shots so I gave it a try.
Is it worth watching, well if you are into action or horrors that give you the creeps then this isn't a good choice but if you do like psychological horrors with a twist then I recommend it.
The opening sequence of Clinical offers some nasty shots because it involves a child doing awful things. Once after that this flick turns into a flick about characterisation and psychology. I can't go too deep into the story because I would be spoiling.
Here and there it do gives some bloody scenes but it's at the end that the real horror comes back and the red stuff do sputter around. The ending will leave you with a few questions.
Overall i enjoyed it but I solved the puzzle quickly. Some say that a lot of scene's were too dark and I agree here and there. The effects used were above mediocre and done on-camera without CGI.
This flick will have his pro's but also a lot of contra's because it's a mixture of horror (begin and ending) and a thriller. Not for the gorehounds but for those who can dig a good riddle mixed with red stuff.
Gore 1,5/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
Is it worth watching, well if you are into action or horrors that give you the creeps then this isn't a good choice but if you do like psychological horrors with a twist then I recommend it.
The opening sequence of Clinical offers some nasty shots because it involves a child doing awful things. Once after that this flick turns into a flick about characterisation and psychology. I can't go too deep into the story because I would be spoiling.
Here and there it do gives some bloody scenes but it's at the end that the real horror comes back and the red stuff do sputter around. The ending will leave you with a few questions.
Overall i enjoyed it but I solved the puzzle quickly. Some say that a lot of scene's were too dark and I agree here and there. The effects used were above mediocre and done on-camera without CGI.
This flick will have his pro's but also a lot of contra's because it's a mixture of horror (begin and ending) and a thriller. Not for the gorehounds but for those who can dig a good riddle mixed with red stuff.
Gore 1,5/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाVinessa Shaw (Dr. Jane Mathis) and Aaron Stanford (Miles) had previously starred together in the 2006 movie "The Hills Have Eyes" as a couple, playing Lynn and Doug.
- गूफ़When Vinessa Shaw's character leaves a message for medication as the movie starts, she gives a 5-digit NPI (National Provider Identification) number. Real NPI numbers are 10 digits long.
- कनेक्शनReferenced in Flix Forum: Clinical (2019)
- साउंडट्रैकJingle Bells
Composed by James Pierpont (uncredited)
Original Publishers Extreme Music Library Ltd
Courtesy of Extreme Music
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Clinical?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 44 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39:1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें