The Killing Room Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
Four individuals sign up for a psychological research study only to discover that they are now subjects of a brutal, classified government program.
| Timothy Hutton | Crawford Haines |
| Peter Stormare | Dr. Phillips |
| Chloë Sevigny | |
| Bill Stinchcomb | Cope |
| Michael Byrnes | Orderly |
| Luke Sexton | Orderly #1 |
| T. Joel Smith | Orderly #2 |
| Nick Cannon | Paul Brodie |
| Gregory Gast | Echo |
| Meade Patton | Forsythe |
| Shea Whigham | Tony |
| Clea DuVall | Kerry Isalano |
| Joan Roberts | God |
| Jonathan Liebesman |
6.10 out of 10 (40 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Entertaining for sure.
posted on 31 Aug 2009This movie is fun because the characters DON'T have depth. The whole point is to try and figure out which psychological profile is the one that they are trying to find for candidacy in their program. It was entertaining, and had a nice twist at the end that outdid Shyamalan's usual plot twist fare. Citizen Kane it is not, but I don't see the point in comparing this movie to the Usual Suspects. Apples and oranges and all that. Its more like a less gory Saw (the first one). And way to throw out the spoiler in the review, Buzz Killington. Handing out spoilers in a review doesn't convey your ire for the movie. What it does in fact do is irritate people who are going to purchase/watch the movie.
Interest premise...but didn't live up to the expectations!
posted on 31 Aug 2009Imagine agreeing to participate in a harmless experiment only to find that it isn't at all what you thought. Well, one lady and 3 guys agree to and find themselves in more trouble than they could ever imagine. While on the surface, they should be suspicious, the promise of $25 dollars an hour proves to be more of a lure than a deterrent. So we are not surprised that after being escorted into a sterile looking white room, given a survey to complete, their personal possessions taken, and then being locked in a room, that the participants begin to see that maybe they have made a mistake. A young eager female profiler has been picked to observe and analyze those things that break people psychologically. Apparently this program's sole goal is to create people who will be suicide bombers for the government. So when the main examiner, shoots the female participant and challenges the remaining/surviving participants to answer questions to save their lives, they find that what was a sure thing, may not be. What will break them and who will eventually be deemed worthy will not surprise you, but the utter lack of depth in the characters will definitely disappoint. What could have worked and really been a decent movie, failed because it did not execute. I wouldn't recommend this movie if you want something truly suspenseful. Instead rent some oldie but goodies like "The Usual Suspects", "Identity" or something with some real grit. This however was extremely disappointing, almost as much as Vin Diesel's Babylon AD.
A movie you really have to watch and decode
posted on 03 Aug 2009Nick Canon was great in this movie. I didn't know who he was when I was watching the movie. This movie is about 4 people that answer an ad for testing. One of the participants is used to being part of these experiments and feels good about being there. There is a questionnaire to fill out and he fills it our quickly and with an air of certainty. The only female in the group seems to be second guessing whether or not she should be there. The third seems to be a transient type. His shoes are taped to hold them together. The forth is just a bit of a regular guy. They are all there to earn whatever money this experiment pays. The doctor comes in and explains a few things and tells them all that regardless of how they do, they will all be leaving with $250. After this is where the action kicks in. This is a story of human nature and how much we place our own safety above others. It was truly enjoyable.
Ultimately disappointing tale given the vast possibilities of its inspiration.
posted on 08 Jul 2009I was intrigued very early in the film when it was revealed that the proceeding would have some relation to the clandestine MKULTRA program ran by the Office of Scientific Research for the U.S. government in the 1950s and 60s. Ostensibly the MKULTRA program had to do with intense chemical and psychological experimentation done on U.S. citizens in order to discover how the mind and conscience-sub-conscience state could be manipulated. Speculation with regard to mind control ran rampant in the mid 1970s when the MKULTRA program was made public after investigations by the Church Committee. Most MKULTRA files were destroyed in the early 1970s; Some have come to light under FOIA requests. No one knows if the program is still active or not.That frightening conspiracy is revealed to be, early on, the driving force behind ,Killing Room. Top notched profiler and all around psychoanalyst bad-ass Ms. Rielly, portrayed convincingly by Chloë Sevigny, opens the film by meeting with the head of an un-named organization for an on-the-job interview. She has been mysteriously highly recommended for a place in the un-named organization for her unique skills. Apparently she is near clairvoyant in her observatory psy-deductive abilities – so much so that it is impossible for a person to ever lie to her. She is apparently the psychological equivalent to Sherlock Holmes. That introduction sounded interesting to me, but I hope you don't really like the idea and perhaps hope for something to come of it. Her super-human skill set is not mentioned again nor ever comes into play for the duration of the movie. A handful of times she is asked for her observations and gives satisfactory textbook answers.Ms. Reilly is asked to watch a drama unfold on tape and give her reactions. The tape shows the occupants of a room being subjected to intense psychological testing. Omnipresent two-way radio chatter give the proceedings a military feel. During this time we learn a very little background of the organization, that the test is taking place in what is called A Killing Room, and the relationship to the MKULTRA program. Later the action moves to real time as the next step of Ms. Reilly's try out.The room is occupied by four U.S. citizens which very vaguely represent the scope of society. A white female (portrayed by the criminally under-used Clea DuVall -HBO's Carnivale-), a neurotic white male, a black male, and a calm white male ex-con ("We have a potential leader" squawks the two-way when he enters the scene for the first time.").The first kill (I assume that is not a spoiler given the title of the movie) is sudden, brutal, and takes the viewer completely by surprise. It made me sit up and mentally rub my hands together. Unfortunately the film fails to capitalize on the sudden burst of momentum.The rest of the movie is a relatively arid affair that rarely surprises, never builds tension, and ultimately falls on its face. A minor Reveal 2/3 of the way through comes too late and lacks continuity or sense outside the realm of far-reaching. The intended emotional impact of that Reveal is therefore non-existent. The menace of the MKULTRA program is forgotten. The reason that the ex-con was identified as a leader type becomes perfunctory. The final card up the sleeve of the film is the moral dilemma faced by Ms. Rielly. This payoff is actually aborted in what might as well have been alternate ending number one on the DVD – a hackneyed daydream what-if sequence that the viewer neither cares about nor believes would succeed. Sevigny did her eye-twitching best to sell the quandary, but the build up just wasn't there. The bleakness of the film guaranteed from the start that there was only one way to go for the finale.The final twist in the last scene was no surprise and, by that time, the viewer doesn't care. It does end with the obvious beginning for a number of archetypal direct to DVD releases.www.popbunker.net @popbunker
Though low budget, intriguing script
posted on 07 May 2009I just finished the movie and decided to check what it stated on IMDb.Like always, movies are underrated or overrated at IMDb.Yes, this is a low budget movie, but the storyline (though it contains holes) is very decent. People who say this is a Saw rip-off, it is most definitely not. I enjoyed Saw I, but the rest of the Saw movies aren't particularly good. This movie is purely about cinematic content, not about Hollywood gruesomeness and brutal mutilation etcetera. If there is a sequel to this in the future, I don't think I'm going to watch it, because that would ruin it for me, I'm sure. But this movie was never set out to be a box-office hit, and I think that was never the intention. So I trust in them to leave it at this film, and not for them to make a cheesy sequel.So if you enjoy a good storyline, it is worth your while.
Great psychological thriller.
posted on 01 May 2009In this review I shall not go deeply into the plot, as I believe that the viewer will benefit from knowing as little of the narrative as possible, seeing as the script offers many twists and turns to any film-goer looking for thrills, and the film delivers on its dark premise, and then some.While films where a group of characters are manipulated and tested upon in many a sadistic and calculated manner have been all the rage since the Saw series, (comparisons to the franchise wouldn't be completely unfounded) this movie has a somewhat different approach to all the torture porn of late by relying on mind-games to get its thrills. Thanks to the swift pace, taut direction and believable cast, this is pulled off tremendously well.The plot concerns under-the-radar experiments by a government-tied group (the purpose of which not revealed to the viewer until later) on a group of random volunteers. It starts off innocently enough when they are asked to fill out a form of questions, but things take a sudden turn for the sinister, and the group starts acting upon instinct. However they are constantly being scrutinised by a team of psychologists, and through conversations with the leader of the project and a talented new employee, we learn that their every move is anticipated and prepared for. This creates a sense of impending doom, and brilliantly we, the viewer, feel like we are observing them along with their captors.The performances are incredibly strong and plausible, and as we learn more about the characters and their motives, the suspense and drama feels all the more engaging. While the idea that experiments like this are still being carried out to this day (the film is based upon real experiments conducted by the CIA in the 60's and 70's) is completely impossible, the script makes it feel completely possible. The whole film twists and turns sharply, making for some genuine bite-your-nails, edge-of-your-seat stuff, something which has been missing from thrillers lately.For fans of this sort of fare, I wholeheartedly recommend this as what is going to be one of the best thrillers of this year. Hell, even if you don't like the genre usually, I think that you should give this a watch. The film will grip you throughout the entirety of its running time until it twists the knife one last time and leaves on a brilliantly sinister note.
Good cast in an off beat thriller
posted on 01 May 2009Four people are brought into a room for an unnamed experiment. What they don't know is that the experiment concerns the breaking point of of people and that there is a very good chance none of them will ever get out of the room alive. At the same time the doctor running the experiment is looking to certify a new assistant.Okay thriller works, I think, more because its oblique, rather than because things make complete sense. I say this because there was a couple of times when I had questions about why somethings happened. I have to add that the cast is excellent and helps to make this worth trying. Honestly I'm kind of mixed about the film and I've been going back and forth about recommending it. I have no opinion other than you're on your own.
Worth watching for the ending
posted on 30 Mar 2009Let me start by saying that a lot of what you're about to read may seem like spoilers, but all of the following plot information is given within the first 10 minutes of the movie.In this movie, the CIA's secret "MK-Ultra" mind-control experiments of the '70s (which really did occur) seem to still be in operation. Four civilians answer a classified ad seeking volunteers for medical testing, only to be locked in a room together and subjected to psychological and some physical torture, plus a little death. This is not "torture porn" though, and aside from a couple of run-of-the-mill gunshots, it actually doesn't involve much graphic violence at all.While there have been many "locked in a room together for a mysterious and violent experiment" movies, this one is different in that it's told primarily from the perspective of an observer: a doctor who is interviewing for a position at the organization. She has no idea what she's about to observe when she arrives, so she joins the audience in horror as the various aspects of the experiment are revealed.This movie has a lot of problems. The writing, mainly the dialog, seemed a bit lackluster, but the competent acting compensated somewhat for that. I also found the use of the shaky camera a little annoying, as was the use of a few little fake-out sequences meant to make the audience go, "Oh, she was only imagining that." You know the kind.Also, the employees operating the experiment would communicate via crackly radio, using lots of military mumbo-jumbo ("echo-2 commence stimulus foxtrot, wilco"), which seemed almost laughably inappropriate, and disproportionate to coordinating closed-room experiments. It sounded like they were an airport tower trying to land planes in a blizzard. It struck me as overly melodramatic, trying too hard to make it sound like a military operation.But for all its problems, this movie will surprise you in the end with its relevance. I'm still feeling it sink in. The ending made this movie entirely worth watching (if not good), which I'm glad I did. There isn't much I can say about it without spoiling it, so I'll just say that it's often our artists -- our filmmakers, our writers -- who tell us where we might be headed. Sorry if that sounds cryptic. You'll have to watch the movie. :)
Seen Better, Seen Worse
posted on 26 Mar 2009The Killing RoomPhil's Quick Capsule Review: The Killing Room delivers a good ending backed up by 90 minutes of strong performances that still, however, is JUST a story about a four people in a room leaving you with the feeling that the whole thing would have worked better as an episode of the Twilight Zone. IMDb Rating: 5/10Best Bit: The opening interview Buy, Rent or Borrow: Borrow If you liked this try: Saw (8/10); Liar (8/10); Cube (8/10)Phil Hobden For more reviews like this check out:http://www.mod-life.net/modlife/index_ugly.htm
Waste of time - low budget cheap flick
posted on 17 Jan 2009This goes to one of the worst movies i have seen list. Whole movie is shot in one room. Director seems impressed with saw series and tried to create similar one room kind of horror/thriller, but sorry to say it's an awful story and end leaves a really bad taste in the mouth. I love saw series not to mention but this movie is nothing more than a low budget, cheaply done poor scripted movie!!!I don't think this movie even can make it to theater but if it did I feel sorry for the the people who paid the money to watch this horrible movie. And on top of that director has a balls to let the viewers know that there will be part 2. Seriously don't waste time and money on it.
A Pretty Good Flick
posted on 31 Aug 2009This movie was all I thought it would be and more. Nick Cannon did a remarkable job playing a serious, mature role. A few things are predictable but not all of it is. The twist in the end hopefully promises for a sequel. A very entertaining movie that kept me interested. When the movie was over, I couldnt stop thinking about it. This movies is certainly one of those films that keep you thinking long after it's done.