Summary:
An asbestos cleaning crew working in an abandoned mental hospital with a dark past starts to experience unusual phenomenon.
My Thoughts:
I’m a big horror fan, so whenever I see a flick pop up on multiple lists (from Facebook groups, letterboxd or IMDb recommendations, what have you), I usually go out of my way to check it out. “Session 9” was one of those films; in fact, I’d seen this film recommended so many times the poster was one I recognized by the time I finally sat down to watch it. I’m glad I finally did sit down to watch this one, but I can’t say I’ll go back. This film suffers from a lot of problems that many independent films suffer: limited locations, so-so actors, a script that maybe could’ve use one more draft; but it also shines in a few moments: the atmosphere throughout is pretty great, there’s a sort of cool twist, and the overall film is just really watchable. “Session 9” wasn’t ever going to win any major awards or jumpstart anyone’s career, but if you’re looking for a relatively well-made thriller, then this one isn’t a bad way to kill an hour and forty minutes.
“I live in the weak and the wounded, doc.”
Gordon Fleming (Peter Mullan, “Hostiles”) runs an asbestos cleaning crew with a few guys, including Phil (David Caruso, “First Blood”), Mike (Stephen Gevedon, “War of the Worlds (2005)”), and Jeff (Brendan Sexton III, “Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri”). There are a few ongoing arguments between the guys, but they mostly all get along. The crew is hired to clean up an abandoned mental institution that was shut down after an experimental procedure on a patient went somewhat awry and she began recounting horrific memories that weren’t hers. As they begin to clean, strange things start to happen.
So, really, this film is fine. I think that, for what it was that director Brad Anderson (director of “The Machinist” and “Transsiberian”) was trying to do, this film accomplished everything it really set out to accomplish, I just wanted a bit more. The film hints at a lot of things but never fully develops them, and, again, I think this is what Anderson wanted, because beneath the relatively simple surface, there is a more intricate plot- he just doesn’t do enough work to really bring that intricate plot to the surface so that all the dots connect. Usually, I really enjoy subtlety and ambiguity in films, because I feel like when two equally possible explanations arise with the ending, I find myself pondering that ending a lot more (think the top wobbling at the end of “Inception”- is Leo still in a dream or isn’t he?). But this film only barely hints at the underlying storyline, which deals with a former dead patient named Mary Hobbes and her treatments. That storyline is the more interesting of the two storylines we’re being shown, and that storyline also takes place in the past, so it’s sort of a mystery to uncover what fully happened to her. The connections made to the present are apparent if you’re paying attention, but I still would’ve preferred something a bit more.
The atmosphere is the real reason to watch this movie. Though the overall plot is fine, the atmosphere is pretty chilling at times. A lot of the more thrilling moments owe their credit to the great location (this was actually shot on location at Danvers State Hospital in Massachusetts), but there was some cool camerawork, lighting, and soundscape effects that helped to really drag the viewer into those creepy halls. It’s not the most terrifying movie I’ve ever seen, but it fits the bill.
Verdict:
“Session 9” is a decent watch, and if you like horror movies and have already gone through the classics a billion times, then sometimes a decent watch is good enough.
Review Written By: