Three stories of the mentally ill: 1. Artist begins taking orders from the dolls he exhibits. 2. Eight year old boy, cruel father, concerned teacher and hallucinatory monster come into conflict. 3. Professor convinced of the Mayan apocalypse prophesies, builds bomb shelter to save his family. Written by

----------------------------------------
myloveincruz from United States
----------------------------------------

I am jotting down a review because nobody else has.

Three stories of the mentally ill: 1. Artist begins taking orders from the dolls he exhibits. 2. Eight year old boy, cruel father, concerned teacher and hallucinatory monster come into conflict. 3. Professor convinced of the Mayan apocalypse prophesies, builds bomb shelter to save his family.

I like psychological movies and this had the mix of elements I dig. A late night psychological mystery/thriller with a mad eye view of events. If you want to take a ride through insanity where you can't be sure what you are seeing is objective reality or hallucinations, this should suit you. Not art house or anything, more like an old HBO Tales from the Crypt. The last story with Lou Diamond Phillips was my favorite and will stay with me.

Giving it a 6 out of 10.

----------------------------------------
zorro6204 from Seattle, WA
----------------------------------------

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.

----------------------------------------
J. Davis (horrorsession@gmail.com) from USA
----------------------------------------

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.

----------------------------------------
Luke D from United Kingdom
----------------------------------------

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

----------------------------------------
bradleybean86 from Philadelphia, USA
----------------------------------------

Some horror films purposefully leave/cut out of scenes in order for your mind to fill in the blanks, perhaps creating more suspense. Some films are very in your face and over the top, leaving nothing to the imagination and often challenging us to continue watching. This movie falls under the first category. Incidentally, I don't think that was the intention of this movie as much as a latent function due to it having no subsistence.

When I hear 'Horror Anthology' I suppose I secretly hope for something along the lines of 'Creepshow' or 'Tales From The Darkside: The Movie.' But this baddie is not even in the same ballpark.

It has so much going for it in the production value, title & setting and utilizes about 5-10% of what was available. The three stories do not have any connection (not that they need to) other than Malcom Mcdowell occasionally popping up as "The Doctor" to narrate or clarify parts of the three boring stories.

This movie has zero gore, and extremely sparing use of blood. I almost wonder if they were going for a PG-13 release because other than a couple female breasts, there's nothing here to justify an R rating. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that EVERY horror movie needs to have heads rolling and blood splashing everywhere; but in the case of a boring movie like this, it would have helped. I cannot recommend this to anyone who is a horror fan.

----------------------------------------
Jacques Du Rand from South Africa
----------------------------------------

Though this film is not perfect and the overall through-line is pretty thin, the 4.5 rating I saw on IMDb before watching this is greatly underrated!

The three individual stories are very subtly told with a soft sense of the intensity of human pain and how the mind deals with it. The directions is superbly intuitive and gentle with the subject matter. The Camera Shots supports the stories that need to be handles with care by keeping simple and just telling the story.

If you are up for a story told in the tradition (although not as mastered) of Johnny Darko, this movies will hold your attention. It explores very deep set human pain and how that pain has manifested in the different characters of the three stories.

Do not see this as a horror film - for the usual horror audience will probably be bored. The themes and the subject matter is perfect for the horror genre, but the intelligence and insight of the filmmaker is better described under an art house style presentation.

Empty your mind, your preconceptions and watch the three stories with an open heart and you will walk away with a great insight into why people that hurt turn out the way they do.

----------------------------------------
LnBK from Canada
----------------------------------------

I loved this movie. When I read reviews here about people spilling wine on themselves while watching this because it was too "boring" and made them fall asleep, I just laugh and am grateful that I am not like them. If you are drinking alcohol during a movie, you are already going to be more tired. It is a slow movie, that is true. Slow doesn't mean bad though. However, if you are watching this movie and then want to judge it because it didn't meet YOUR expectations, then please don't write a review about it and give it 2 stars. Every movie has its own intention. Give it 2 stars if it doesn't make sense AT ALL or if the acting is just straight up horrible, or maybe if it's called ", but not when it clearly achieves its goal.

Sanitarium's intention was not to be a horror flick, it was to give us a perspective of the human mind when it is ill. You see, if you cared even 1% about what it's like for other people who are mentally sick, then this movie provided you with answers better than any other movie regarding the same subject.

The fact is that when you are mentally ill, you won't see the world around you the same as those who are healthy.

I highly recommend this movie and if you decide to watch it, don't watch it to be entertained, but instead to be educated.

----------------------------------------
billcr12 from United States
----------------------------------------

Do not be fooled by the name Malcolm McDowell in the credits, as he is hardly even in this bore fest. His role is more of a Rod Serling of the Twilight Zone guide to each of the three episodes. None of them work very well, as they just drag on. First up is John Glover as an eccentric artist who makes morbid looking dolls and is considered a genius. He thinks the dolls are real and they give him messages about his sponsors. Of course, it ends badly. The second story concerns an eight year-old boy who sees a grim reaper type of figure following him around. He had an abusive father and a pretty and concerned teacher who tries to help. Another sad ending here. Number three is the worst as Lou Diamond Phillips is a college professor who is waiting for the end of the world as predicted by the Mayan calendar. It flashes back and forth between his underground bunker and what leads up to it. It just does not work on any level. Go back to A Clockwork Orange to watch McDowell at his nastiest best.

----------------------------------------
lathe-of-heaven from Sunny Southern California, USA
----------------------------------------

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...

----------------------------------------
matix-jc
----------------------------------------

I never write reviews on here but decided to for this film mainly because, for a random pick of the week for me, I enjoyed it, but I think it's either overlooked/under-appreciated in many aspects and also a little over-appreciated at the same time based on the reviews I've read thus far.

The entirety of the film isn't that great.

7/10 for the third act, though.

Potential spoilers ahead**************

If you watch this movie, watch it for the third act, and the third act alone.

Unfortunately, the third act comes to an abrupt and horrid end.

First and second act were alright.

Be aware that this is not, in any way, a horror film. It could be deemed a psychological horror film, but, if anything, it is merely just a psychological drama. At best. And not just because it deals with mental illness.

The acting is mediocre, depending on the act. The "main characters" do a splendid job themselves, especially LDP, but the over-worked/over-used Malcolm McDowell does nothing to enhance the stories with his narration and brief interjections throughout (though I do love his narration skills better than his actual character portrayals).

The cinematography is what attracted me most, especially in the third act.

It dives into the deep-end of mental illness, but unfortunately lacks substance. Thankfully the basic plots sort of allow you to understand what is happening to the victims/patients and you can find an understanding of what it is they're dealing with. You'll notice there is more narration in the first and second act, semi-describing what it is that was, is or did happen. The third act plays itself out rather well on its own, with little narration.

The first act is creepy, for what it's worth. Perhaps that's just because I hate dolls, and no, that is and shouldn't be a major spoiler.

The second act is just depressing and lacking in substance beyond the fact that it is depressing (from a child's perspective, and relating the main character's experience to true life).

The third act is where this "movie" shines. I say "movie," because I've never been a fan of movies that are basically short stories combined into one giant film, like the ABC's of Death. It isn't a movie to me as a work of art because the short stories are not connected, and if all done by different directors, do not flow together, at all, in any way. As such I don't think it's fair to review this film as one who piece and must be dissected, at which point, there's really no point getting into too much detail about act one and two.

Watch this film for the third act, and the third act alone. As soon as the story gives way and you go, "Oh wow," turn it off, because the last five minutes and conclusion of the "film"/third act are an absolute joke and basically spits on the entire build up/dramatic effect prior to it happening.

All in all not bad for what it is, but the 7/10 is purely for the third act.

It would be 9/10 for the third act if the ending wasn't such garbage.

"Movie" overall ... a busted 4/10.

AKAs Titles:


Certifications:
Germany:18 / Netherlands:16 / UK:15