Hospital Maldito

You can't kill what's already dead Sounds like a cliché? It is. This is a movie that only it's mother could love, still for horror fans this has some campy entertainment value, the setting is a dark abandoned hospital, and who doesn't like that? The acting is hilarious and and it's a hailstorm of horror clichés, seriously, you could make a drinking game out of it. It really get's quite funny after a while. But then we have the dog. My god what was that?? ! truly the stuff of nightmares! Some special effects are actually quite good and gory but not used much, surprisingly maybe. Still It does drag on a bit so be sure to have your chosen beverage ready when you watch this.

The friends Emmett (Happy Mahaney), Freddy (Josh Holt), Marie (Nicole Rayburn), Kevin (Jilon Ghai) and his reluctant girlfriend Jessie (Trish Coren) decide to spend the Halloween night in an abandoned hospital. Meanwhile, the younger Allan (Michael Samluk ) meets the old friend of his father Arlo Ray Baines (Dig Wayne) and asks him to help to find his vanished sister Meg (Rachel Melvin) in the same spot. The two groups meet each other in the mental institution section on the haunted third floor and they find that they are trapped in the place. Jessie has visions from the past and discovers that the ghost of Jacob (M. Steven Felty), a former patient that raped a little girl and burned the hospital, is trying to escape possessing their bodies that melt down with his evil spirit.

"Boo" is a messy ghost story, with a confused screenplay and poor development of characters, especially Jessie. This lead character and her relationship with her mad mother are the key point of the story, but their stories are awfully disclosed. Further, the character Kevin acts like an annoying moron. The group using an old elevator that works in an abandoned building is ridiculous. However, I startled in some moments with the eerie atmosphere. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Hospital Maldito" ("Damned Hospital")

I was happy to rent "Boo" after reading that it was from the same producer as "Dog Soldiers," which I found wonderfully relentless. While "Dog Soldiers" is on my list of films to buy, I soon found "Boo" to be tedious. It is the sort of movie I began to watch in bits for it was becoming too aggravating to sit through in one stretch. While I appreciate horror films made on a small budget (and therefore, it can be assumed, made out of a passion for the genre and not a mere eye on box office returns), recent films, such as "Boo," rely on SUDDEN LOUD NOISES to elicit their scare moments. (It's the new 'screeching cat leaping out' gimmick.) This film made me jump once. However, when a film uses a LOUD NOISE or sudden ghost/killer reveal a second time, the impact is usually lessened, and when this happens a THIRD time, and then again, the 'scares' become predictable for the audience now knows the rhythm of the film, that whenever there's a quiet moment, there will be a JOLT, or whenever a character is about to move out of frame, the ghost/killer will be standing there. And really, what suspense can be given to a film when there is an overuse of a creepy little girl suddenly, without actually moving, advancing toward another character, accompanied by A LOUD SOUND. The squeaking, slowly moving wheelchair was much more effective for then a sense of dread was built, a 'What's going to happen?' apprehension. JOLTS just become numbing, and then boring.

I can forgive bad acting but there are certain true reactions to which we can all relate and when a character does not REACT the way that we would, that is when the amateurish performance becomes distracting. If my girlfriend/boyfriend or best friend is murdered, my reaction is horror and anger; in this film, there is shock (and one character gets very upset and weepy) but then everyone just seems to gloss over this and resumes looking for a way to escape the hospital. The murder then becomes a mere plot device, another 'reanimated dead' complication for our remaining cast to soon deal with.

Great use of a particular costume however, and it's always wonderful to see Dee Wallace Stone on screen.

SCHLOCK would have been a better title for this absurd excursion into a poor excuse for a fright flick.

Nothing redeems it. Not the story, the sub-par acting from a mostly teen cast, the witless dialog, the tired old explanation for all the goings on, and the complete lack of logic.

Whenever things get dull, another fright scene with someone gurgling on blood or turning into a gooey monster of decomposing flesh, is supposed to provide the kind of shock appeal to target a young audience.

Let's hope the kids today are a bit more discriminating in their taste for horror. This one is below the mark all the way.

The only redeeming feature is the sleazy look of the abandoned hospital grounds. Enough to make your skin crawl, disgustingly dirty, rundown and evil looking.

But the story and the characters are an insult to anyone's intelligence, poorly acted and directed to make this a complete waste of time. A writer like Stephen King could have done something with the basic idea--but it's too late now.

Well, Sci Fi channel was "treating" viewers to an all day long horror fest. BOO was the only one I diddnt recognize so I decided to give it a shot. Man was that a mistake.

This movie was so amateur on so many levels where do I start?

First off this movie was not even remotely frightening. You would actually be amazed at exactly how many times this movie manages to not scare you. The special effects are third rate. Which actually brings me to another point, in a HORROR movie exactly how do you manage to get the color of blood wrong? I mean isn't that the very FIRST thing you get right? Give me a bottle of corn syrup and red food coloring and I promise I could make more realistic blood in 10 seconds.

There are exactly 2 kinds of blood in this film. Jello like (yes jello like, chunky, shiny, and see through), and syrupy and off color, almost orange...like buffalo wing sauce. Frightening indeed!

Next is the acting, or an odd lack thereof. I mean seriously this was cue card reading caliber. No chemistry, no delivery. There have been infomercials and video game voice recording with more authenticity. Not to mention how miscast some of the parts were (like the long haired meterosexual wimpy pretty boy cop? HUH???).

Finally the special effects. Lemme break em down. The most impressive was possibly the skinless dog. Mildly cool (yet done with mediocre puppetteering. I mean I believe its head was the only thing that moved.) Ghosts which were merely actors with 5 dollar white face paint (seriously), and finally the weak exploding corpses. You see when any baddie is shot, even with a small 22 handgun they merely explode in a very low budget 70's movie way (to apparently save some cash with their 100 dollar special effects budget. I mean even the girl who gets shot in the heads head wound is apparently just a red painted on dot. My god, I could buy a gunshot wound makeup pack for like 3 dollars.

Anyway nothing in this movie is compelling or even mildly frightening. I must admit I had to leave with 7 mins. left in the movie so maybe something spectacular and deeply frightening happened at that point but I doubt it. Terrible, and frankly boring movie. Use only for MST3K treatment.