The Facility

First I'll say that I did enjoy this movie. It had a pretty cool premise, with some promise. And all of these clinical movies where people take experimental drugs, they always have the guy who's been there before and knows everything. This one has that person as well. There are some cliches but it has promise. It doesn't always deliver on that promise though. It never fully explains everything which leaves you wanting more. If you have a couple of hours and it pops up on the TV, it won't waste your time and you'll probably get into it, but you probably won't remember it long after you watch it.

"The Facility" has an eerie suspense in it, at least during the first half. Barnard, Coleman, Reid, Roberts et al are all capable performers and deserve much better scripts. Unfortunately I was able to see the direction the film was going by the time the first three "victims" had isolated themselves and gone bonkers as a result of the "pro-nine" drug they had been administered. It culminates in little more than a bloody mess, and a few brief follow-ups to signal that the 80-minute film is over - apparently it's based on an actual occurrence. I had been hoping for more of the eeriness, for example: when Katie discovers that Adam (Barnard) is actually one of the controls. The concept of people lured to a remote facility in order to earn money and finding out that they are being systematically tortured and left to their own devices is nothing new, but I thought that the first half-hour or so was very well done and suspenseful. Barnard is probably a star in the UK and is very expressive. He was also starred in "Citadel," which is even worse - louder and even less coherent and more gory than this ultimately disappointing thriller.

'The Facility' is about a group of middle-to-upper class people who volunteer to test a new drug called Pro9. If you can get over the fact that all but one appear far too well-to-do to feel the need to be human guinea pigs, then you have a reasonable premise for a horror/thriller movie.

Naturally, things go wrong. The drug makes people go crazy and look like they're suffering from extreme sunburn. I'm sure the writer wanted to convey a message about how bad pharmaceutical companies are. However, if that was the 'hidden message' then it's a little too well hidden.

What transpires plays out like a low budget zombie film (almost like a rough prequel to 28 Days Later). When the side effects start to show themselves in the test subjects, they just go crazy (think 'The Infected' from 28 Days Later) and, due to the 'sunburnt-effect' make-up, appear like zombies.

What's left is people running and hiding from their former colleagues all the way through it.

That wouldn't be so bad if the characters were a little more defined. However, half the test subjects are pretty unlikable and the others (even the good ones we're supposed to root for) are just too bland for us to be bothered about. The acting is as good as you can expect, but it isn't the actors' fault that they have so little to work with.

It's not the worst horror/thriller film out there, it just probably could have been a little better.

In summary, the acting was solid, the story was solid, and there was a lot of tension throughout. I am really surprised by the low rating for this movie. It is not a cheesy gore fest like a lot of movies out there. It uses the unknown and unseen which is often much more frightening. There are a lot of scenes where can only hear what is happening but that creates even more tension. You are along for the ride like the characters in the movie. They don't always see what is happening and you are left to wonder about the horrors of the unknown. Most of the characters are likable and you can feel sympathy for their plight. They don't fight and bicker constantly but spend most of their time trying to figure things out and survive. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and think anyone who prefers good writing to gore will also enjoy it.

To be perfectly honest, after just viewing Ian Clark's (director/writer) The Facility, I jumped onto IMDb to find that the rating for it was exactly as I predicted. At the time of writing the film sits at just under 5/10, perhaps not a true marker since it's largely under seen and very few people have bothered to review it, but not a surprising score thus far since familiarity of formula breeds contempt...

Plot basically finds a group of human guinea pigs enrolling for a two week trial at a remote research centre. They are to be injected with a new drug called Pro-9, and after their two week stay they will pocket a cool £2000 each. The group consists of the needy, the inquisitive, the bold and the stupid, and sure enough once night falls and the lock down commences, some of the participants get a reaction to the drug...

It follows the standard trajectory for such a set-up. Characters are introduced, we get to know them for half hour, you quickly learn who the A-Hole is, and then it's drug reaction time and we are thrust into murder death kill and locked in siege panic. Tis a time for heroes, maybe even some interesting revelations? Who will survive? If anyone? Maybe there's a twist in the tale as well?

For his debut feature film Ian Clark has played safe and utilised the low budget wisely. The pic shows him to have great promise in the horror genre, his keen sense of claustrophobic atmosphere is evident and carries the story well, and he knows how to construct a horror scene. He also gets more than solid performances from his lively cast, where Alex Reid (The Descent/Wilderness) is a reassuring presence.

It isn't over bloody, or even terrifying and full of boo jump shocks, but it tickles away at the nerve that doesn't like to be unhinged, and it has a good ending to boot! If you are searching for something new in the sub-genre of zombie/infected siege movies you will be disappointed, but this is actually better than some of those bigger budgeted sub-genre movies. While it marks Clark out as someone British Horror fans might like to keep an eye on. 6.5/10