Recensioni degli utenti

Clinical starts off intriguing. The two leads (Vinessa. Shaw and Kevin. Rahm) do a good job as traumatized psychiatrist and disfigured car accident victim seeking help. We get flashbacks of events that lead both of them into their current state as PTSD sufferers. We feel empathy for these characters. They are having a miserable Christmas holiday.

For the first hour of the movie the action is brief and scares tantalizingly short. That's okay with me. I love a slow burn IF the action can build in a logical way and deliver a shocking payoff. Clinical doesn't do that.

Dr. Mathis and Alex reveal their mental and physical injury side by side, It seems a bond will form between them. Alex gets more demanding of her time and the doctor grows uneasy continuing to treat him at her house. We know their is something connecting the two and we want to know more about it. The disturbed and violent Nora (India Eisley) is the key.

As events progress, they make less and less sense. The last part of Clinical degenerates into the typical psycho-chasing-woman-around-the-house gore fest. We've all seen that too many times. I almost blacked out rolling my eyes at the screen.

Clinical has a nice set up. A story that promised and intelligent exploration of trauma and memory ended in disappointment. 5 out of 10, sorry.

The first half of the film seemed promising enough by giving us a mystery that unlocks as we progress with the viewing. However, the ending totally destroys any sense of impressive writing by the creators. Not only is the supposed twist easily predictable, but there is almost no logic to the progression of events in the end. Nor is there any satisfying explanation which brings us to the one major fault that overshadows all others: there is no closure to the story. Are we just supposed to assume on our own how the story of our protagonist actually ends? At least other non-closure endings like inception were intentional and meant to make the viewer think. This one however doesn't. Its as if the story has a beginning, middle, almost done, but no real ending. Did no one teach these writers how to close a story out? I'm guessing not, and hopefully in the future they may go back to school and actually finish 8th grade writing.

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

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.

'Clinical' was a very different film to what I expected going in. Based on the synopsis and then the opening scene I thought we were looking at more of a psychological horror. There are elements of that to it, but it would have to said it is more of a thriller than anything with a dash of mystery. The story manages to be both intriguing and captivating all at once. There are two stories being followed throughout the film and we the audience don't know whether they connect or not, and if so how. All this makes for a fun watch.

Vinessa Shaw in the lead role thoroughly impressed me. Halfway through the movie I had to look her up to see where I recognised her from. It was from 'The Hills Have Eyes' which I also quite enjoyed her performance in. The rest of the cast were surprisingly strong as well and all this made for a very pleasant viewing experience.

'Clinical' is exactly the type of film I like. It's daring, clever, doesn't insult its audience, and most of all it's a lot of fun to watch. I would certainly recommend watching this film if you get the chance.

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

Started out optimistic that this might be interesting, but quickly became disappointed. I know this film is supposed to have elements of both a psychological thriller and horror, but in all brutal honesty, I felt like this movie made light of mental illness and does not take it seriously almost using horror to make fun of it. That's what bothered me the most about it. Certain things were too stereotyped (inaccurately stereotyped too) and the plot went nowhere. The plot moves slow and then takes a quick turn and everything unwinds rapidly, almost like watching 2 separate films. Little character development. I would not recommend this film, especially not at night if you are alone.

I would consider this psychological horror rather than thriller and I think it works quite well in this respect. I am now more afraid of the human psyche and I know for sure that I would never want to be a psychologist. However it is very repetitious in the first half and so it gets boring very quickly. Also there is not much going on visually in style, colors, shots, camera movement, etc. Overall I think it does a good job within its obviously small budget.

Okay 60 second review begins ... NOW ...

I admit to not having high hopes for this movie, after having seen the trailer, but overall I am a fan of Netflix's original productions so I gave them the benefit of the doubt.

Unless you're bored to tears, just skip this movie. I thought it *might* go into Martyrs territory, but it didn't. The horror aspect is fleeting and feels cheap, but at least doesn't resort to jump scares.

I thought maybe the flick would end with a satisfying Shyamalan- esque resolution, but instead I was just surprised that the movie was over. Like ... that's it?

Still giving it 5 stars because it gave me hope for an hour and 30 minutes.

Interesting story but too slow and a bad ending , I would not watch it again

Like another review, it's more horror than thriller. Held my interest.

This movie is definitely not a perfect ten... but I'd like to see it rise above the unfair rating it's been given here. I'm guessing that the people who rated it low, felt triggered in some way by the sensitive themes (suicide, mental illness, abuse) and took it much too seriously. Must be people who identify with the bad things that happened in their lives and make it their goal to take out the fun from everything, for everyone. The movie, though, is good fun -not funny, though, mind you- for psychological thriller fans. It's got a bit of body horror too and graphic depictions of nasty things. It kept me guessing and at the edge of my seat a few times. I kinda saw the twist coming, but it still was pretty good. All in all, if you want to be thrilled, this is a good movie to have on your list.

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