Part of

Part of

Tuesday, January 18, 2011


(Spoiler Alert-killer revealed) 

  Insane sounds like a good name for a horror movie. It certainly caught my eye. There are a lot of different things you can do with that. It also means that the movie should be “insane” to say the least. So is Insane an “insane” movie, or was I “insane” to watch it?
  The movie takes place at the Bridgeburn Hotel, which is in the middle of nowhere. Sarah is lost, and ends up staying the night. Actually, she ends up staying a lot longer than that because a mysterious guy has taken her. Two weeks later her sister Jenny shows up at the hotel looking for Sarah. Jenny must figure out if she is in the right place before it is too late.
  The best way to describe this movie is that it is a poor poor poor man’s Psycho. There are a few similarities between the two movies, but the differences are a big part of its downfall. The first similarity is the setting. Both movies take place at a rarely visited motel/hotel. The difference here is that the Bridgeburn is a lot larger than the Bates Motel. It is hardly believable that one person runs a hotel that large, while the Bates Motel seems to be just big enough for one person to manage.
 Who is that one person? That person is David, who serves as the manager, concierge, bellboy, cook, waiter, and bartender for the hotel. Like Norman, he does his best to make guests feel at home, and is definitely an odd character. There are several times in the movie where they show flashbacks of David as a young boy. They continue to build on them until they reveal why David is such an odd person, and has become a killer. Guessing David is the killer from almost the beginning is easy, but waiting for the explanation to why he is the killer is the only thing that kept me watching. Too bad it is a weak explanation for someone they want the audience to believe is “insane.” As with Norman, let’s just say his mother is the source of the problem, but in a different way. Norman is insane while David is more like traumatized.
  While Norman dresses as his mother, David dresses up like one of the toy soldiers we see him painting at different points in the movie. The unusual thing about his outfit is the gasmask that he wears. He wears it because when he finally corners his victims, he throws a smoke bomb at them causing them to pass out. Yes, that is right, “smoke bomb.” Now where he gets these smoke bombs from is anyone’s guess. Does that make me think he is insane? No, just really weird. What killer throws a smoke bomb at you? Give me a break! On the other hand, he does make up for it with some descent kills particularly the one at the beginning.
  Getting away from the Psycho comparison, there are a few other parts of the movie that are questionable. As briefly mentioned before, it is a big hotel. It is hard to believe Sarah or Jenny wouldn’t question why they have to check in a room so far from the lobby when there is no one else there. On top of that, there is another part where Jenny is sneaking around the empty hotel. It isn’t a shock that he finds her considering how quiet it is except for the clear sound of her shoes walking through the hallway.
  Then there is a scene that comes out of nowhere. There is a guy driving around on an ATV, who stops and finds a covered up car. David shows up to kill the guy just as the guy discovers blood in the car. There is no point to this scene other than showing that there is a huge cliff beside the hotel. They could have done that without killing some random guy that has nothing to do with the story. As the movie whines down, there is another scene showing a struggle between David, Jenny, and Jenny’s boyfriend where David ends up being shot. As expected, this isn’t the end of David. He rebounds to eventually chase Jenny outside of the hotel. The question is how come he is chasing her as if he wasn’t shot more than once a few minutes ago? Did soldier boy have on bulletproof vest to match his gasmask?
  So the answer is that I was “insane” to watch this movie. Another promising title that let me down. For a movie called Insane, it didn’t come close to being “insane.” It did have some insanely bad acting, and plenty of questionable scenes. There is a descent kill, or two, but there is nothing in this movie that screams insanity. It is basically an extremely weak version of Psycho, so I have to give it .5 pools of blood.



  1. OK, did I get this right... you didn't like it that much, but you still gave it 5 pools of blood? What the hack?! :) Now I'm confused :)

    Anyway, I didn't like it at all. It was cheap, thrill-free and rather dull. Probably the worst Scandinavian horror flick I've ever seen. I gave it a 2.00 out of 10. Great review though :)

  2. Don't be confused! I gave it Point 5 pools of blood. I guess it is hard to see the .5 with the black background. I'm crazy, but not that crazy! Glad to hear I wasn't the only one insane enough to see this movie.

  3. I had picked this one for the horror podcast, but had to remove it recently. It got me in the beginning and I was quite taken with it, but then it just fell apart. I guess that I liked it more than you, but was not a huge fan myself.

  4. Fearshop: After the opening, I was into the movie, and had some hopes for it. However, like you said, "it just fell apart." The acting was bad, and the story became weak. I just wasn't liking it after a good start. I could see why you changed your mind about having it on the podcast.
    Thanks for commenting!


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...