Sanitarium

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 any sense at all or if the acting is just embarrassingly bad, 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 even cared 1% about what it's like for people who are mentally sick, then this movie provided you with answers better than any documentary, book or some 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.