Rating: 
Summary: High on style and atmosphere, a bit short on substance...
Review: By far the most compelling part of this movie is the building, the former Danvers State Hospital in Connecticut (a real place, by the way). I am a huge fan of abandoned buildings, especially abandoned buildings with stories behind them. The writers/directors have tapped into this vibe and it radiates throughout the film. The film is heavy on atmosphere and stylish visuals. It is obvious that great care went into each shot. I give the film five stars for this reason.I give the film just shy of four stars for the storyline. The acting is excellent but the story itself is fairly formulaic. It is a character study in madness but it is more madness derived from stereotypes than understanding. The film was good in building tension and keeping the viewer on the edge of the seat but in the end it fell into almost typical movie cliches. The director tried to give the storyline a different twist and almost succeeded but the style seemed more important than the actual story. It balances out to four stars. It is well worth watching, especially if you are looking for a creepy film but in the end what you'll remember is the building. On an aside, I believe that some of the deleted scenes should have been kept (though from these scenes you'll see confirmation regarding stereotyping madness).
Rating: 
Summary: BORING
Review: This movie is really boring. It's not good on atmophere, it has lousy acting, and terrible script and well this movies reeks on all levels. It is almost as dumb as Jack-O. This is not worth seeing, buying, or renting. You'll be a better person for not seeing this movie. Trust me you're not missing anything. Go back to the slasher flicks, because they are even more interesting than this moad of ...! Even Faust is a better choice than this load of filth!
Rating: 
Summary: Start the Insanity!
Review: This is one of the few movies I've ever seen that left me feeling sick after watching it. Quite a tribute to the movie makers, eh? Really, the only other movie I felt like that after watching was Seven. This movie will put you deep into the minds of some mentally unstable people. People who were very normal once, people who either have weak minds or who have been wounded somehow, people you may even know yourself.....and it may even force you to take a really good look at yourself after this movie is over. Which is perhaps the scariest thing of all.... The two people this film focuses on are a mental patient from the hospital many years ago, and one of the workers there now trying to clean the place up. The mental patient's story is told through some taped sessions, found by a worker by chance and listened to by him on his free time to find out what sort of things went on in the hospital. The worker's story was told in bits and pieces as well, and the viewer really won't know who the insane person is or why he does what he does until the very end. The 2 stories show how different people in totally different circumstances can end up reaching for help in the same way...and have the same kind of destructive results. Very creepy stuff. I must say that this movie seemed fairly boring through most of it the first time I watched it. But the last 20 minutes were heart-stopping! Hang in there, and watch it again some time. I just watched it for the second time, and it was TWICE as creepy, TWICE as heart-pounding, and TWICE as sickening. If you like deep-down psychological scares, this is a must-see.
Rating: 
Summary: What is it about places like that?
Review: Truly, what is it about abandoned institutions that is so compelling? Is it their size? Is it all the pain and unhappiness that grew like cancer inside of their walls? Is it the mystery in their vast space and dark corridors of things we can only speculate that draws us in?
This movie totally plays on that premise.And if you identify at all with what I am saying,this movie is for you. But keep a light on......just in case.
Rating:
Summary: Great on atmosphere and setting, weak on plot
Review: About ten minutes into Session 9, I was completely prepared to love this movie. The setting, an old, empty insane asylum with its own morgue and cemetary, was creepy as hell; and the premise about a cleanup crew hired to eliminate asbestos tiles and other toxic materials had real potential. Also, the characters and the acting were above average for a modern horror flick. For these reasons, I give the movie three stars. The problem with this movie is, it never quite delivers on what the first few minutes promises you. This asylum offers a lot of scare potential that the movie doesn't take advantage of. And I really don't mind a scary movie starting slow, but Session 9 STAYS slow. It doesn't pick up the pace until the last fifteen minutes or so...and the ending, designed to be a shocking twist, just isn't. So, bottom line: if you're a hardcore horror fan, check this one out. It might work better for you than it did for me. Other movie viewers should probably steer clear.
Rating:
Summary: excellent horror movie
Review: I am a horror movie junkie, i love them to death,..(heh!) anyway i watched this movie before i went to bed one night and it disturbed me so much i had trouble sleeping. Belive me i havent had that problem sience i was a child. this movie deserves ten stars!
Rating:
Summary: Creepy, but missed the mark with unanswered questions
Review: I watched Session 9 last night before I went to bed. It was around 11:30, and I didn't turn off the set until after 1:00. Big mistake. I went to sleep on edge, feeling really weird, like all the dark shadows contained some sort of...I don't know. And that's just it: I don't know. I don't now what the antagonist was in Session 9. I don't know what the point of the movie was. I don't know what to make of the ending. Was it supernatural, like The Shining? Or was it merely psychological, like any guy-under-pressure-kills-people movie? I don't know. The asylum was way beyond creepy. It, alone, deserves the three stars I gave this movie. But the plot is weak, and the wrap-up was even weaker. More spookiness could have been wrung out of this movie if the writer/director had utilized the setting more effectly and shown flashbacks to when the asylum was in full use. Or shown ghosts. Or shown things moving in the asylum that weren't human. Or something. I can't recommend Session 9 -- although I wish I could. It's a great idea. But it was flawed in its execution.
Rating:
Summary: Session 9
Review: Written by Brad Anderson & Stephen Gevedon; Directed by Brad Anderson (ASIN: B00005UQ9F)
Reviewed by Shikhar Dixit The best rule for a horror story is "Don't show the monster." Alfred Hitchcock knew it. Robert Wise (The Haunting, 1963) knew it. Director Brad Anderson has mastered it. Much like the original version of The Haunting, Session 9 also takes advantage of another great rule in horror: "Atmosphere, atmosphere, atmosphere." The camera drifts around corners and into the harsh shadows of Danvers State Mental Hospital, a real hospital and portrayed in its genuinely rundown condition.
Gordon Fleming, played eerily spot-on by Scottish actor Peter Mullan, leads the team of Hazmat Elimination Co. into the vacant corpse of a once prominent mental institution famous for its invention of the pre-frontal lobotomy. Their job is filthy, dangerous and stressful--to strip all the carcinogenic asbestos insulation from the building before its imminent refurbishing one week later. David Caruso, Stephen Gevedon, Josh Lucas, and Brendan Sexton III round out the cast as the rest of the elimination team, each hinting at the shortcomings that have landed them in this hellish job. The promise of a $10,000 bonus hanging just beyond reach, they set out to clean the facility. But Danvers State also holds it own attractions. For Mike (Stephen Gevedon,) it is the taped sessions with a psychotic patient named Mary Hobbes. For Hank (Josh Lucas,) it is the stash of old coins and trinkets he discovers hidden in the walls. For Phil (David Caruso,) it is perhaps the ultimate ownership of Hazmat Elimination Co. And for Gordon, it is something far more unsettling and not altogether natural. Perhaps the most imposing character in the film is Danvers State Mental Hospital itself. Shaped like a bat, with a once administrative area branching off into "wings," the farthest reaches of this enormous creature were reserved for the most severely psychotic cases...cases like Mary Hobbes. An effective use of foreshadowing, steady rise in tension, masterful cinematography and a group of solid character-actors makes Session 9 the best film to grace an otherwise flagging genre since, well, The Haunting. The DVD (from USA Home Entertainment) contains the 100-minute feature film in letterbox, Deleted Scenes (including a wisely rethought alternate ending,) Story-to-Screen storyboard comparisons, Director's Commentary (with blessed on/off feature,) a chilling theatrical trailer, and the fascinating featurette, "The Haunted Palace," a look at the very real location and some of the art inspired by it. This review is for the Region 1 encoded DVD with English Closed Captioning and Dolby Digital Stereo.
Rating: 
Summary: Creepy location + no suspense = complete underacheiver
Review: This movie had potential. Still frames of the Danvers hospital will send a chill up your spine. However, the story just does not create any suspense. The movie has the typical formula of 95% introduction, 5% climax and ending with no middle section. No gradual building of suspense that keeps you at the edge of your seat. Nothing related to the story really happens in the first 95% of the movie, and then in the last 5%, a chain of events occurs. The only problem is that most viewers probably know exactly who is behind the chain of events the minute the first event happens. So there is no "whodunnit" supspense whatsoever (watch the deleted scenes and director's commentary and you will see this is the type of suspense he was going for). The only suspense is that you are waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting for something to happen. Then it does and you know exactly who did it and why. It is like watching 3 hours of convenience store surveilence tape in anticipation of a robbery and then the thief walks in, waves to the camera, and takes off his mask. The setting is awesome, the acting is pretty good, and the characters are likeable... but the story [stinks]!!! Even though it is a suspense film (which are not believable to begin with, but that is the point), certain things do have to add up to for the film to have any credibility. One huge thing doesn't! Why doesn't Mike just take the tapes home instead wasting the whole work week listening to them, especially when they are trying to get the project done in one week! The movies does a pretty good job of depicting him as a bright, hard-working guy. So why, you ask, would he do something so stupid? Why? Because the sessions are creepy and the director wants to distract you from the fact that nothing is really happening. The result? The whole film seems contrived. [weak].
Rating:
Summary: This movie has "DIRECT TO VIDEO" written all over it
Review: The creepiest thing about this movie are the images of the asylum itself, however, the director fails to use the creepiness to it's full extent. Showing eerie rooms in wide angle, and blinding broad daylight hardly adds to the suspense. Take a few pages out of David Fincher's playbook, and get back to us. This movie really is just weak. The acting is awful (Especially the young kid with the mullet), the direction is juvenile, the script is pretty bad, and the casting... well... it's no surprise that David Caruso is the "big named talent" for this piece of junk. The worst part of this movie, is the extra footage, showing an interview with the writer-slash-director, who talks about "his creation" like he created the next "Citizen Kane". Talk about being pompous. This guy needs to get a clue. He is one inch away from directing "10-10-321" commericals (come to think of it, I can safely say, that at least would hold the audience attention more than this steaming pile of clap-trap!) The big mystery previously left unanswered is this: I gave it 2 stars, instead of 1, because I live close to Danvers, MA, where this film takes place. That's it folks. That's the reason. Locale.
| 
