Own the rights?
268 out of 305 people found the following review useful: Some movies are too good for people, 2 December 2003 Author: mflana1 from Los Angelis CA
I usually don't write reviews on imdb. But I wanted to in this case after reading so many user comments for "Session 9". I think it's a shame that film audiences today have become so lazy. Here is a film that displays artistry, subtlety, and intelligence, relying on the viewer to actually use their brain instead of be bombarded by useless imagery. This truly is a horrifying movie. And so many people have problems with it... people say it's the "worst piece of crap" they've ever seen, but then go and high-five each other while watching "The House on Haunted Hill" or "Jeepers Creepers 2". Movies like this are rare, but making a come-back. The horror is psychological, and the director's handle on atmosphere is intimidating. I found this film to be one of the most disturbing movies I'd seen in a long time. Another great independent horror film, "May", is also suffering from poor reviews by people who don't seem to really understand what they're watching, and react angrily to that. If you are a serious movie fan, who likes to use your brain and be challenged by a film, watch this movie. It's fantastic. If you'd rather just see what the latest computer effects wizards are dreaming up, there a number of other films where things pop out at you and teenagers get killed by something. Stick to those.Session 9: 10/10
158 out of 176 people found the following review useful: "What are YOU doing here...?", 14 May 2002 Author: hippiedj from Palm Desert, California
Seeing a film like Session 9 just reaffirms that there are truly great films still being made.While many (including the filmmakers) will find comparisons to Don't Look Now, The Shining, and even a nod to The Changeling, Session 9 still stands on its own as a most effective, brooding experience of dread -- and that's a good thing! I found the style and tension more genuine than the grandiose The Shining, and Session 9 relies mostly on real fears and no gratuitous material to entertain. This film wants to creep you out and that's its soul purpose. No pretty young GAP models, no trendy MTV-influenced rap/metal soundtrack, no breasts, no giggle-inducing decapitation effects. If you want those, by all means go watch something else as there are plenty other films that offer that to those with short attention spans. If you want to be drawn INTO a film, a place of fear, and THINK as well, Session 9 is like a therapy session of nightmares.The story is simple and complex at the same time, as workers removing asbestos from the massive Danvers Mental Hospital slowly unravel along with secrets from taped audio recordings of a former patient. I never saw the characters' backgrounds as "underdeveloped" as some have complained -- you don't need to know EVERYTHING about these guys and besides, more information about them would have slowed the film down even more, and its nice, brooding pace is just right as it is. And don't worry if some of the things that seem like "clues" are left unresolved, that's part of the fun. Just like I still say many of the weird "clues" in David Lynch's works like Twin Peaks and Mulholland Drive are just there to be weird and draw you in, not that they actually have any direct connection to the main story.The actual Danvers Hospital is an amazing setting as the whole structure is a character all it's own and will disturb you without it having to do much but just BE there in the film. The minimalistic soundtrack is unsettling and downright perfect (I even bought it on CD and am still trying to figure out why it attracts me so much, playing it in the background while, say, typing away something like this....).Each actor does a fine job -- yes, even David Caruso (some of you need to get off his back!) as a guy who seems to get a bit impatient yet maintaining a sense of calm. Peter Mullan, Steven Gevedon, Josh Lucas, and Brendan Sexton III seem like real, regular blue collar guys. It's refreshing to see a film not insecure in having a mature, rough-edged cast. By giving you a sense that these guys are real (yes, even though they tend to be slacking off quite a bit in places when they're supposed to get the job done in a week), the quiet dread of the story will draw you in and you'll be absorbed completely. Of course, if you appreciate less flashy films like this, you'll agree it's damn near perfect. Oh, to those here on IMDb who criticized the scene with a jar of peanut butter left on the floor, welllll, think about this: considering the state of its consumer, do you think that whoever left it there cared where the container was disposed? Man, do you people get picky over the strangest things! Whatever may seem implausible in the story or the characters' actions really doesn't wreck the film, as it is to be appreciated much for its atmosphere and story. I didn't find the ending to be so hard to understand at all, those that had their mind set that they didn't like this film were too busy being angry to just sit back and let everything present itself quite clearly.If this film is categorized as horror then it's one of the best I've ever seen, definitely one of the best in years. It takes a LOT to scare me, and there's one specific scene with Josh and his experience in the basement that caused a wave of tingling goosebumps all over my body. It was exhilarating to be scared that effectively by a single scene!Folks, you can't trash this film because it doesn't give you easy explanations or allows you to have some cheap voyeuristic thrills. Many of you who didn't like Session 9 seemed to know from reading its summary that it wasn't offering slam-bang entertainment. If you like your mind to be stimulated and love being absorbed in mysterious and wondrous storytelling, Session 9 is by my definition a flawless piece of work. For anyone else, I'd just say........."What are YOU doing here....?"
82 out of 100 people found the following review useful: Gets under your skin, 27 August 2001 Author: wytshark
Everything about this movie impressed me. The script was lean and inventive, the direction stylish without being overblown, the acting top notch. Even the shot-on-video cinematography looked great (with the exception of one or two exterior shots that had a hint of video look to it, most everything else was "filmic" and artistic).I also appreciate any horror movie that can generate real tension and suspense from imagination and suggestion rather than relying on lame and lazy tricks that populate most horror movies (if something as limp as Urban Legends can be called a horror movie).First rate film and I recommend to anyone who appreciates a thinking-man's horror film.
65 out of 80 people found the following review useful: You won't know what hit you, 24 August 2003 Author: Lars Gorzelak Pedersen from Aarhus, Denmark
No point in mincing words: Brad Anderson's Session 9 is the best horror movie I've seen in a long time. It's intelligent, well-written, it's completely unpredictable, it looks great (I didn't really notice until the second viewing how well the editing and the photography work together), and the soundtrack is downright creepy. Until recently only two films had managed to make me lie awake at night: Dario Argento's "Opera" and Tobe Hooper's "Texas Chain Saw Massacre". Well, now the list includes three films. Honestly, there is no excuse not to see this one, folks. Horror doesn't get any better than this.
41 out of 48 people found the following review useful: don't watch alone, but watch it in the dark, 11 March 2005 Author: mals13 from United States
I work at a video store and when customers ask me what's a good horror movie that will actually get to them, I don't suggest any of the Freddy or Jason movies. Those are for fans, and I don't consider them to be genuinely frightening. Session 9 is, most definitely, genuinely frightening. It takes place at a mental hospital that is legend where I live. So most people know what I'm talking about when I say Danvers State Mental Hospital. It is one of the few psychologically affective movies that I've ever seen. It takes the audience on a ride through a building that seems alive to it's visitors, and forces the audience to resolve for themselves why things are happening to each character. If you want a movie that is challenging and thought-provoking, this is the one. I always tell my customers to watch this movie in the dark, but not to watch it alone. Just be aware that if there is any distraction during the movie you'll have many questions about it. I hope you enjoy it as much I as do every time I watch it!
50 out of 69 people found the following review useful: Imperfect but smart and genuinely creepy, 25 August 2001 Author: Chris La Jaunie from New York City
With a brilliant premise, "Session 9" is a slow build of genuine atmospheric creepiness. More akin to Nicolas Roeg's classic "Don't Look Now" than more recent horror fare with high body counts, director Brad Anderson effectively builds tension in layers of voiceovers and (mostly subtle) foreshadowing to build to a climax of madness, with sparing use of the cheaper horror devices. Unfortunately the characters are not as fleshed out as one would have hoped, so we are left with some unanswered questions (we would have liked to have met Gordon's family and Hank's girlfriend. Why did Mike drop out of law school?). Though the subtle horrors of this film may fail to grasp the short attention spans of younger moviegoers who consider "I Know What You Did Last Scream" to be the de facto standard of the genre, this is a very cleverly executed, if imperfect, thriller.
41 out of 55 people found the following review useful: Creepiest horror film in years..., 1 November 2003 Author: David C from Texas, USA
Session 9 is the creepiest horror film I've seen in years. Brad Anderson has made a movie that is subtle, and features actors playing everyday people who not only act and talk like real people (which means none of the usual horror atrocities of going off in the dark alone, etc), but also aren't killed off one by one according to their billing in the credits. The tension builds slowly, without a cheap shock scene in sight, until it is almost unbearable. Towards the end, the plot runs out of steam and the twists are a bit anti-climatic. However, everything is so well-crafted and executed in this picture, from the writing, cinematography and acting to the use of sound and digital film, that it's a moot point. Anyone with an ounce of interest in the horror genre should rent this little known gem.
25 out of 33 people found the following review useful: Brilliantly realised horror with weak ending, 31 August 2001 Author: Matt Clifton from New York
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Session 9 is a welcome return to the type of film whose horror relies not on cheap-thrill multi-decibel glissandos, jump-cuts and viscera (although it has its share of that), but on strong interplay between characters, and the gradual realisation that the worst things you can imagine are not "out there", but inside your own mind.The characters are true to life, with Gordon, the head of the asbestos-clearing team (played by Peter Mullan, who also shone in the excellent My Name is Joe) being especially well-drawn. His stressful situation at home intrudes more and more into his working day. From the start we know he has to take this job to stay in business, and this means the team only has one week to clear the building.Work at the asylum begins normally enough, but as the truth about what happened in the mental asylum comes slowly to light (through the archive tapes of "Session 9"), the team begins to fall apart. One worker discovers a hoard of coins and valuables, and then goes missing. Paranoia runs rampant among the remaining characters, and accusations fly. At this point, we don't know who to trust. To some extent, all the characters become possessed by the atmosphere of the asylum.It's clear there's evil at work. However, as disturbing as the backstory is, it doesn't tie in well enough with present events to tell us for certain where this evil originates. Is it something dormant in the asylum, awakening with the team's intrusion? Or is it a potential for harm within all of us? Whichever it is, the conclusion is horrifying and effective.In a sense, there are two stories here, both told intelligently, but the connection between them isn't quite strong enough, and you're left feeling only mildly cheated. That said, this is still a disturbing, powerful film with scenes which will stay with you for a long time.
29 out of 43 people found the following review useful: Definately worth seeing...not what I expected though, 21 August 2001 Author: mumcity from Connecticut
I had read a lot on Session 9 before going to see it and had certain expectations. Although it started out slowly, the story was good. The "scary" parts were fewer and farther between than I expected and there was some mild gore at the end. The psychology and personalities were what I found most interesting. As the days passed after seeing the movie, I found myself remembering what I had thought to be insignificant things, and putting more of the subtle "creepy" things together.
20 out of 27 people found the following review useful: Spooky, low budget, worth watching, 7 February 2003 Author: FilmFlaneur from London
After writing, editing, and directing more romantic-based projects, Anderson turned to horror to make this, another just as effective low budget outing. The film makers took full advantage of the immediacy of video and ‘found' surroundings to sustain an atmosphere of unease, leading inevitably to terror - presumably reflecting both the proximity, and the success, of The Blair Witch Project (1999). The differences being that Anderson's cast provide no first-person monologues direct to camera, and Session 9's events are more 'structured' (although the structure of Blair was concealed, rather than truly absent). There's a professionally written musical score too, amplifying events, and an ending which allows a resolution to the mystery. But like it's famous predecessor, there's a sense of natural horror here, well handled for the most part, providing a similarly refreshing change from ‘studio' product.The plot concerns an asbestos cleaning crew working in an cavernous, abandoned mental hospital (the real life Danvers State Hospital in Danvers, MA). Under a tight deadline to make a $10,000 bonus, tensions soon run high as they grow familiar and interact with the institution's history of lobotomies, multiple personality disorders, child abuse and gloomy incarceration. Leader of the gang is Gordon (Peter Mullens), who faces personal problems at home. It also includes his nephew Jeff (Brendan Sexton) who has a fear of the dark, Mike (Steven Gevedon) a failed law student, the brooding and scheming Hank (Josh Lucas), and Phil (suspected to be on drugs, who has had his girlfriend stolen by Hank).The labyrinthine institution dominates the film and the actions of the characters. Gordon is undergoing a stressful familial relationship; Hank locates a trove of personal possessions hidden by inmates; Mike discovers and becomes absorbed in the recorded testimony of a threatening multiple personality; while Phil has concerns about the viability of the project and Gordon's mental state... It would be surprising if so many disparate elements came together into an entirely satisfactory whole. Predictably enough, one of the weaknesses of Session 9 is that some of the terror, so carefully built up, is dissipated by a climax which leaves too much unspoken. Most importantly, Anderson's script fails to unite completely the two main threads of the story (the usurpation of personality and Gordon's personal crises). Phil blames Gordon's problems on `fatherhood', but by the end of the film a much more malign influence has been confirmed. But there's an absence of real satanic dialogue between the possessor and the possessed. It leaves the viewer hanging, and the inner tensions within Gordon's character remain nigglingly unresolved. While the occasional imprecations from ‘Simon' may seem a brief, obvious way of suggesting the forces at work, they fall short of convincing motivation. More damagingly, Gordon's relationship with his family is too distanced (a sad phone call, or a gaze from a parked car) to evoke a real feeling of the effects of evil on their lives. In the event, the final claim by ‘Simon' that he `lives in the weak and the wounded' sounds more like an apologetic round-up of an instigating role than a convincing boast of events.Having said that, Gordon's breakdown is perhaps the best thing in the film. Our sense of his subtle, increasing alienation is a testament to some fine acting by the underrated Peter Mullan. In The Claim, (his last film before this), Mullan played a powerful, but morally guilty, man whose estrangement from human relations comes to dominate his life. In Session 9, Mullan again plays a man excluded from his kin - although on this occasion by forces overwhelming, in addition to his own dubious actions. Both experiences lead to destruction.There are some fine, spooky moments within Danvers, the superb environment in which the action is set. The old mental hospital, decaying and monolithic, provides an atmosphere that would be impossible to achieve except on such an ideal location. Hank's discovery of the hoard in a wall outside the morgue, for instance (ominously stressed by a compelling backward tracking shot inside while he scrambles, out of shot, for the dusty loot). Jeff's panic in the passageway as the generator fails, running for safety, the threatening dark in hot pursuit; or just the quiet moment when Gordon studies his ravaged fingers with unstable amazement, are all standouts. The artefacts that Mike discovers of Mary Hobbe's interview are convincing too: scrupulously presented, the eerie tapes convincingly acted. So effective is this evocation of past events, in fact, that one feels disappointed that Mike does relatively little with his discoveries by the end.`Its gonna get ugly' says a prescient Phil at once point, and so it proves. So much of the first part of the film is fine, that the ultimate descent into gore, however telegraphed in advance, is somewhat of an anti-climax. Hank's madness, alone and stripped in a dark corridor, is considerably more disturbing than the stalk n'slash events which follow. Perhaps Anderson thought so too, as he delays confirming the identity of the maniac until the very end. Along the way he confounds the audience with an ambiguous stand off between two major characters, a lot of separated principals blundering through gloomy passageways, and red herrings like Phil's strange meeting with two men (presumably drug dealers) in the yard. Interestingly, the American DVD apparently includes a further subplot, featuring a homeless Indian women - subsequently dropped for the UK release to help tidy up an already straggling narrative line.What remains is a good horror film - surprisingly good, given the limited resources of the production - unlikely to please those who like their terror on a grand special effects-laden scale, but of interest to those who enjoy excellence on a budget. Director-writer Anderson should be better known, as the appreciative reviews of his other films by fans show for his direction is sure and effective. Session 9 is a worthy addition to his underrated output, and is well worth looking for.
Add another review
