Sanitarium

Heh, I have to admit right off that about 30 minutes into the film I'm sitting here TOTALLY mystified, trying to piece together how this little boy ties into the old artist who makes dolls... Seriously, I'm straining my brain trying to figure out what the HELL is the connection. And then, get this... It wasn't until AFTER I see Lou Diamond Phillips walking around speaking into a recorder that I ***FINALLY*** realized that I was watching a bloody Anthology! What a total PUTZ...! Then I remembered that a while ago I had indeed read about the film, but by the time I watched it, I have totally forgotten that it was an Anthology.

Well... if THAT doesn't inspire heartfelt confidence in my thoughts and impressions, I don't know what will...? : )

Anyway... Truly, what a different film. Just like I say in my Summary, at the beginning you are expecting a COMPLETELY different type of movie. At first, you get a kind of a 'PUPPET MASTER' vibe; and even the soundtrack is somewhat reminiscent of the Full Moon films. So, I'm going along trying to get into it; the movie is moving kind of slow. But ultimately it was pretty decent.

The 2nd segment was okay; it was well done, but it just wasn't really my favourite. Just ONE thing... And, this shouldn't give anything away. BUT... What the HELL was the deal at the end of that segment, when the guy writing the article had this EXTREMELY sudden and abrupt impulse, like he just realized something shocking, where he goes running all excited to go look in the room...??? What the hell got him all worked up anyway? I must've missed that, but it DID give the end of that segment a bit of a mysterious feel. I'll have to go onto the message boards and see if anyone discusses that.

As many here have said, the 3rd segment is the weightiest and it is done VERY well. Lou diamond Phillips' acting is quite good, since of course he pretty much has to carry the entire segment. I wanted to note too that the soundtrack for the last segment is especially good; the continuous melody in the background REALLY lends itself to the poignant events happening on the screen.

I pretty much agree with Matix JC's review (not so much his Summary title, but more the actual content of his review) Despite his very negative sounding Summary, he did end up rating the film a '7', which is pretty decent, and I personally agree, but I rated it a '6' to be more objective for others. As he says, there IS merit to the other segments too, but mainly the last one is by far the best part. With this film, I think that it is important to go into it 1) Unlike me, REALIZING that it IS an Anthology. That way you will expect the change of stories. 2) Don't be expecting TOO much, particularly of the 1st segment. Because, you could very EASILY allow it to overshadow your opinion of the rest of the film. So, you need to be patient and go with it until the last segment. 3) FWIW, make sure that you watch a little bit through the end credits because there is a little teaser after it, which gives it a nice little slant that makes you think...

Although this isn't one of my favourite Horror films, I believe I understand what the deal is with this movie and why some people don't like it... You see a number of reviews (quite repetitively) saying 'Boring...' 'Boring drivel...', 'BORING Slogfest!', etc... And, I think I can understand why. If you go into this movie expecting it to be a full blown Horror film, you WILL indeed be very disappointed. I think Matix JC also mentions that in his review. This has a few brief Horror elements in it, but mainly like he had said it is a Psychological Thriller with strong Dramatic elements. So, I can see why a LOT of people would think that it IS boring drivel and a waste of time. One guy said that being an Anthology, he was expecting something like 'CREEPSHOW' or 'TALES FROM THE DARK SIDE', but this film is nothing like that.

What I feel might help you determine whether you would enjoy this movie or not, would be, first, whether you even enjoy Anthologies at all. Some people don't. And then a close second would be whether you enjoy 'Horror films' where the emphasis is not really on Horror, but more so about the stories, the characters, and in this case, an overall theme of Sanity, since the stories are set in a Sanitarium. If you are the kind of person who can be patient with movies, especially low-key Horror films that are a bit on the slow side at the beginning, and you can do without a lot of Action, Gore, or Sadism, THEN you might have a decent chance of enjoying this film. Because by the time you get through the whole movie, and hopefully get drawn in by the emotional weight and intensity of the last segment, I think you may appreciate the film as a whole better.

I hope this helps...

The direction/writing was really good but the acting was even better. If I had any complaint it would have to be about the production design which seemed to be pretty basic in some spots, but it was a minor issue. But again, the acting was great and the direction were really good. Contrary to the other reviews, this is NOT a PG-13 movie, it is R scary despite the lack of blood. Remember these stories (except for one) occur in the minds of the people and therefore does not NEED a lot of blood. The scariness is in the old-fashioned suspense and in trying to figure out what is real or not and in good old-fashioned acting. I hope they make another one someday. But I doubt it. It certainly showed the acting talents of seldom used actors like Lacey Chabert and Lou Diamond Philips.

This isn't your average horror anthology by any regard and the unique way of this film's storytelling may put off many viewer's that are expecting a V/H/S or Tales From the Crypt type of film. Instead what we get is a look into the minds of three different mentally ill patients and the horror that is real to them in "their" world. Since there are three installments, I'll outline them individually, although there is one constant throughout the film and that is Malcolm McDowell as Dr.Stenson, who gives a bit of a narrative connecting one story to the next.

The first segment,"Figuratively Speaking" stars John Glover, who convincingly plays the fragile artist Gustav, whose connection to his creations(which pays a nice homage to the Puppet Master franchise) & some foul play by a trusted friend, lead to his ultimate downfall.

Segment two, "Monsters are real" involves a young boy named Steven(David Mazouz "Touch") who has the unfortunate case of Catatonic Schizophrenia. At the young age of eight his life crumbles around him as his visions of a beast like stalker begin to plague him. His teacher Ms. Lorne, played by the gorgeous Lacey Chabert, tries to render help to Steven when she suspects abuse from home. All of which leads to quite a mysterious conclusion, blurring the lines between imagination & reality.

The third segment, "Up to the Last Man" stars Lou Diamond Phillips as Professor James Silo, a husband & father who becomes deeply obsessed with ancient Mayan prophecies telling of an upcoming apocalypse. As his grip on reality fades he begins to design the mother of all bomb shelters and like in the second segment, insanity & reality become intertwined.

This is a film about perspective, it's purpose isn't to terrify or deliver buckets of blood, but to bring to light the views from inside the minds of these three random, but quite unique patients all remanded to the same asylum. It walks us through the horror's that the exist only in their minds, well, mostly only in their minds, as the viewer is left decide what in fact is real. The direction is executed perfectly in each story by directors Bryan Ortiz, Bryan Ramirez and Kerry Valderrama. Equally noteworthy was the score, giving each piece it's own specific atmosphere & identity. If this sounds interesting then by all means give it a go. It's no masterpiece, but it made for an original & intriguing watch.

A rather enticing and dark glimpse into psychosis and the overwhelming grip it can have on controlling thoughts and actions, the result of which leaves the main characters in the Sanitarium. Each part demonstrates a variance in mental illness to portray the falling of the world around them due to their delusion, with dark conclusions.

At times the stories can come across as rather coy although this was generally answered toward the end of each story. The tempo across each story is predominately maintained to continue the dark edge but I was left somewhat disappointed by the lack of development of the stories; some aspects felt rushed.

However it was, to me anyway, an engaging watch. A film that isn't likely to blow many people away but can maintain viewing pleasure through emotion in relation to delicate revelations throughout.

65/100

OK, Malcolm McDowell is just here as a "name", he's merely the narrator. Moreover, his comments are not particularly welcome, particularly after the second scenario.

That aside, this is a very good horror movie, a trilogy of tales in classic fashion. The cast is fine, the photography is excellent, the soundtrack lush and properly climatic. It's as good as any other horror/macabre movie out there right now, certainly on a par with "The Purge" for example, but fewer than five votes here? Zero critical reviews on R/T or linked here? I don't understand that at all, my first instinct was that this must be some crapola indie film, and I'd expect maybe two 9 or 10 star reviews comparing it to the best of Hitchcock (by people who had never posted any other reviews until they were hired to work on the film). But it's not, it's a well made, mainstream film with real actors and professional craftsmanship. By all means check it out.