Welcome to Danver's Lunatic Asylum - until the '80s home to many a poor soul and a fair amount of controversy. Fast-forward to the present, and the place is condemned. It stands rotting and neglected, a relic of a more ignorant age. Its walls are crumbling, the paint peeling, the whole structure decaying under the burden of time - God knows what dwells that within its poisoned halls. Asbestos for one, which is why Gordo's team has been hired. An asbestos abatement crew, they're pros, but not exactly fit for purpose right now.
The team is riddled with anger and antagonism. Phil and Hank glare at each other, Hank having spitefully run off with Phil's girl. Mike is miffed in general, somehow having flunked out of law school, despite coming from illustrious legal family. Brought on at short notice is Jeff, Gordo's nephew, and despite being a pretty good natured, is also a mulleted ingénue, unused to dealing with hazardous material, and also afraid of the dark Gordo isn't doing great either, since he's reacted to his new baby and oddly, and is showing the strain of a fraught home life. Despite the myriad issues, he accepts the job, and imposes an ambitious, possibly irresponsible, timetable: they have one week to decontaminate the hospital, a scheme crazy enough to land him among Danver's by-gone patient list, because the facility is huge, a vast winding labyrinth of corridors, tunnels, passages, kitchens, morgues, basements, patient 'treatment' rooms and hidden cubby-holes, the perfect setting for a horror film, in other words.
Sadly, this excellent, intelligent film was deprived of a cinema release in the UK, but that by no means proves it unworthy. It is, in fact, one of the best horror/ghost stories of recent times, belying a low-budget with elements often neglected now i.e. a good script, good performances, good control of mood, good characterisation. Far, far too many horror films rely upon gore and flashy camera-work to terrify, but Session 9 succeeds by virtue of good drama. Is Danver's really haunted? It would certainly seem that way, with the overly curious Mike rummaging through the asylums records and uncovering a batch of taped interviews with a distressed victim of multiple personality disorders, whose shrink is slowly digging deeper into her psyche. While the tapes (sessions 1 through 9) are secretly played and more facts emerge, the strained relationship between the men grows more and more volatile, and each man slowly making discoveries and forming suspicions, about the menacing building (which is both paying and possibly poisoning them), and about each other. Has a spirit been released by the men's violation of the asylum, or is it just basic pressure? How long they all cracks? Session 9 was apparently written about the asylum, with filming in there always an intention. Certainly, the building is a character in itself; with its decrepit structure and mysterious, deadly past, it is a convincing visual metaphor for a deranged mind you could easily imagine someone going mad within it. Perhaps this is what Session 9 shows best, and why it works so well: it demonstrates that the human mind can conjure up horror without any help from the supernatural - ghosts and demons are all in our heads, but sometimes they can burst out if we let them. Technically, the film is excellent. I read some rather snooty reviews that claimed the digital camera-work was a bit scrappy, and that there were still serious limitations to the format at this early juncture. But the film-makers certainly had me fooled, because overall, the film is very polished (admittedly, I saw it on DVD). In fact, the 24p camera lends the film an atmosphere and lustre all its own, the immediacy, occasional (slight) blurring, and available light giving it the impression of really being shot on super-high quality home video, or through someone's own eyes. I think this film demonstrates much better than Sin City or Star Wars how cinema (particularly low-budget cinema) might benefit from the digital medium.
The performances are also excellent. Peter Mullan conveys real desperation and madness as the increasingly disorientated Gordo (though he occasionally goes slightly OTT), while David Caruso, as Phil flailing against the tide as he tries to keep the imploding gang together, is especially good, communicating the working-man's tragedy on show here. On a basic wage, he has hitherto been sustained by camaraderie and beer, but both are in short supply at Danver's. If the film goes slightly off the rails, it's in the ending, which while it felt like a logical and effective conclusion to me, was unnecessarily complicated by the editing and tried too hard to come across as a 'twist', pandering to genre expectations. That aside though, this is intelligent and confident, proof that assured style, quality acting and mature direction can be far more haunting than any Saw or Hostel style wobbly-cams, blood-letting or shock effects.
The team is riddled with anger and antagonism. Phil and Hank glare at each other, Hank having spitefully run off with Phil's girl. Mike is miffed in general, somehow having flunked out of law school, despite coming from illustrious legal family. Brought on at short notice is Jeff, Gordo's nephew, and despite being a pretty good natured, is also a mulleted ingénue, unused to dealing with hazardous material, and also afraid of the dark Gordo isn't doing great either, since he's reacted to his new baby and oddly, and is showing the strain of a fraught home life. Despite the myriad issues, he accepts the job, and imposes an ambitious, possibly irresponsible, timetable: they have one week to decontaminate the hospital, a scheme crazy enough to land him among Danver's by-gone patient list, because the facility is huge, a vast winding labyrinth of corridors, tunnels, passages, kitchens, morgues, basements, patient 'treatment' rooms and hidden cubby-holes, the perfect setting for a horror film, in other words.
Sadly, this excellent, intelligent film was deprived of a cinema release in the UK, but that by no means proves it unworthy. It is, in fact, one of the best horror/ghost stories of recent times, belying a low-budget with elements often neglected now i.e. a good script, good performances, good control of mood, good characterisation. Far, far too many horror films rely upon gore and flashy camera-work to terrify, but Session 9 succeeds by virtue of good drama. Is Danver's really haunted? It would certainly seem that way, with the overly curious Mike rummaging through the asylums records and uncovering a batch of taped interviews with a distressed victim of multiple personality disorders, whose shrink is slowly digging deeper into her psyche. While the tapes (sessions 1 through 9) are secretly played and more facts emerge, the strained relationship between the men grows more and more volatile, and each man slowly making discoveries and forming suspicions, about the menacing building (which is both paying and possibly poisoning them), and about each other. Has a spirit been released by the men's violation of the asylum, or is it just basic pressure? How long they all cracks? Session 9 was apparently written about the asylum, with filming in there always an intention. Certainly, the building is a character in itself; with its decrepit structure and mysterious, deadly past, it is a convincing visual metaphor for a deranged mind you could easily imagine someone going mad within it. Perhaps this is what Session 9 shows best, and why it works so well: it demonstrates that the human mind can conjure up horror without any help from the supernatural - ghosts and demons are all in our heads, but sometimes they can burst out if we let them. Technically, the film is excellent. I read some rather snooty reviews that claimed the digital camera-work was a bit scrappy, and that there were still serious limitations to the format at this early juncture. But the film-makers certainly had me fooled, because overall, the film is very polished (admittedly, I saw it on DVD). In fact, the 24p camera lends the film an atmosphere and lustre all its own, the immediacy, occasional (slight) blurring, and available light giving it the impression of really being shot on super-high quality home video, or through someone's own eyes. I think this film demonstrates much better than Sin City or Star Wars how cinema (particularly low-budget cinema) might benefit from the digital medium.
The performances are also excellent. Peter Mullan conveys real desperation and madness as the increasingly disorientated Gordo (though he occasionally goes slightly OTT), while David Caruso, as Phil flailing against the tide as he tries to keep the imploding gang together, is especially good, communicating the working-man's tragedy on show here. On a basic wage, he has hitherto been sustained by camaraderie and beer, but both are in short supply at Danver's. If the film goes slightly off the rails, it's in the ending, which while it felt like a logical and effective conclusion to me, was unnecessarily complicated by the editing and tried too hard to come across as a 'twist', pandering to genre expectations. That aside though, this is intelligent and confident, proof that assured style, quality acting and mature direction can be far more haunting than any Saw or Hostel style wobbly-cams, blood-letting or shock effects.