"The Facility" has an eerie suspense in it, at least during the first half. Barnard, Coleman, Reid, Roberts et al are all capable performers and deserve much better scripts. Unfortunately I was able to see the direction the film was going by the time the first three "victims" had isolated themselves and gone bonkers as a result of the "pro-nine" drug they had been administered. It culminates in little more than a bloody mess, and a few brief follow-ups to signal that the 80-minute film is over - apparently it's based on an actual occurrence. I had been hoping for more of the eeriness, for example: when Katie discovers that Adam (Barnard) is actually one of the controls. The concept of people lured to a remote facility in order to earn money and finding out that they are being systematically tortured and left to their own devices is nothing new, but I thought that the first half-hour or so was very well done and suspenseful. Barnard is probably a star in the UK and is very expressive. He was also starred in "Citadel," which is even worse - louder and even less coherent and more gory than this ultimately disappointing thriller.
34 Reviews
No. No. No. great acting wasted on lack of story
jbar1926 May 2013
No. We aren't falling for it. This is just a poor retread of 28 Days.
A bunch of people go to a remote facility to become human guinea pigs for some secret, unknown drug. Good premise, right?
Wrong. We are expecting the people on the drug to do some really freaky things.... maybe mutations, maybe hallucinations or visions, right?
No. Nothing like that. Just some short of breath people with skin rashes running around with no indication of what is going on.
The problem is the pacing. The movie moves like molasses. Plus, there isn't even enough molasses to make waiting worth it.
Here's my summary; A diverse group of English get a mystery drug, they run around like a Benny Hill skit, there is a tiny bit of violence and then BOOM, the movie is over and we miss most of the denouement.
Guys, it's a well acted, well produced movie. But those aren't a substitute for a story. Booo! Booo!
A bunch of people go to a remote facility to become human guinea pigs for some secret, unknown drug. Good premise, right?
Wrong. We are expecting the people on the drug to do some really freaky things.... maybe mutations, maybe hallucinations or visions, right?
No. Nothing like that. Just some short of breath people with skin rashes running around with no indication of what is going on.
The problem is the pacing. The movie moves like molasses. Plus, there isn't even enough molasses to make waiting worth it.
Here's my summary; A diverse group of English get a mystery drug, they run around like a Benny Hill skit, there is a tiny bit of violence and then BOOM, the movie is over and we miss most of the denouement.
Guys, it's a well acted, well produced movie. But those aren't a substitute for a story. Booo! Booo!
Potential wasted
Skinsofourfathers9 June 2013
There was a very solid acting group here. Which I think is what draws you in from the beginning. But actors can only work with what they are given. Here it isn't much. You should recognize a familiar face in one of the actors as he just played a very decent agoraphobic father bent on saving his daughter. But there are too many moments in this film that leave you scratching your head and wondering "What? Why did this just happen?" Or worse, "Why didn't this just happen?" Those to questions haunt you through the film until it becomes a race to see if you can stand watching until the end. Honestly it was a good production team coupled with a great acting team wasted on a story that just wasn't there. I guess if you are one of those people that are literally obsessed with medical horror maybe. But even that is a stretch. Avoid this film but check out what else the cast has done. Because I can tell you it is better than this film.
Increadibly pointless
fluffchop28 May 2021
Well filmed, well written, well acted and so on. There's nothing wrong with the film, it's all good but just a bit like why did I bother watching.
------------------- Surely they would have done trials on innocent lab rats prior to this debacle. Why would they let a journalist in a closed trial?
------------------- Surely they would have done trials on innocent lab rats prior to this debacle. Why would they let a journalist in a closed trial?
A medical experiment, a movie failure
Stevieboy6669 June 2020
A group of strangers take part in a 2 week residential trial of a drug called Pro9 at a research clinic in Great Britain. Pretty soon deadly side effects kick in.
Straight away I was put off by the horrible shaky cam, made me feel quite queasy. The characters are all pretty much unlikeable and the actor varies between acceptable and weak. Despite acts of violence and attempts to be scary I found this movie void of interest and pretty boring. The closing credits couldn't come soon enough.
Better than expected
x_specter_x1 June 2013
In summary, the acting was solid, the story was solid, and there was a lot of tension throughout. I am really surprised by the low rating for this movie. It is not a cheesy gore fest like a lot of movies out there. It uses the unknown and unseen which is often much more frightening. There are a lot of scenes where can only hear what is happening but that creates even more tension. You are along for the ride like the characters in the movie. They don't always see what is happening and you are left to wonder about the horrors of the unknown. Most of the characters are likable and you can feel sympathy for their plight. They don't fight and bicker constantly but spend most of their time trying to figure things out and survive. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and think anyone who prefers good writing to gore will also enjoy it.
felt like half a movie
dwuksta19 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The acting was reasonable, directing fairly seamless, storyline predictable. How you could give it nine stars is beyond me, surely only a subjective cast member.
It's the kinda film that opens so predictably that you're almost sure it will contain some twists, but it doesn't. Seems low budget, but the funds were spent wisely. Problem is, everything you think is gonna happen, happens, and is not really resolved, except for a few narrative notes before the closing credits, that kinda annoys me in films, especially when there was no substance during the film itself. They human guinea pigs turn up, get these mysterious injections for the promise of 2 grand payment for 2 weeks of clinical trials, some of them go nuts, few of them attack other patients and it's all over before sunrise. We don't know why, we don't know who is doing it or what the tests are about, nothing. I thought the homeless guy was possibly the best actor, rest were fairly generic, nothing memorable. There were some suspenseful moments, like waiting to see what the drug effects would be like, little bit of violence and gore. I gave it 4, it had potential to be a good horror, but was disappointing. My wife gave it a score of 4 pillows out of 5, 5 meaning she slept thru the whole thing.
It's the kinda film that opens so predictably that you're almost sure it will contain some twists, but it doesn't. Seems low budget, but the funds were spent wisely. Problem is, everything you think is gonna happen, happens, and is not really resolved, except for a few narrative notes before the closing credits, that kinda annoys me in films, especially when there was no substance during the film itself. They human guinea pigs turn up, get these mysterious injections for the promise of 2 grand payment for 2 weeks of clinical trials, some of them go nuts, few of them attack other patients and it's all over before sunrise. We don't know why, we don't know who is doing it or what the tests are about, nothing. I thought the homeless guy was possibly the best actor, rest were fairly generic, nothing memorable. There were some suspenseful moments, like waiting to see what the drug effects would be like, little bit of violence and gore. I gave it 4, it had potential to be a good horror, but was disappointing. My wife gave it a score of 4 pillows out of 5, 5 meaning she slept thru the whole thing.
ProSyntrex. Pro-9. Warning: Side Effects May Be Fatal...
hitchcockthelegend11 November 2013
To be perfectly honest, after just viewing Ian Clark's (director/writer) The Facility, I jumped onto IMDb to find that the rating for it was exactly as I predicted. At the time of writing the film sits at just under 5/10, perhaps not a true marker since it's largely under seen and very few people have bothered to review it, but not a surprising score thus far since familiarity of formula breeds contempt...
Plot basically finds a group of human guinea pigs enrolling for a two week trial at a remote research centre. They are to be injected with a new drug called Pro-9, and after their two week stay they will pocket a cool £2000 each. The group consists of the needy, the inquisitive, the bold and the stupid, and sure enough once night falls and the lock down commences, some of the participants get a reaction to the drug...
It follows the standard trajectory for such a set-up. Characters are introduced, we get to know them for half hour, you quickly learn who the A-Hole is, and then it's drug reaction time and we are thrust into murder death kill and locked in siege panic. Tis a time for heroes, maybe even some interesting revelations? Who will survive? If anyone? Maybe there's a twist in the tale as well?
For his debut feature film Ian Clark has played safe and utilised the low budget wisely. The pic shows him to have great promise in the horror genre, his keen sense of claustrophobic atmosphere is evident and carries the story well, and he knows how to construct a horror scene. He also gets more than solid performances from his lively cast, where Alex Reid (The Descent/Wilderness) is a reassuring presence.
It isn't over bloody, or even terrifying and full of boo jump shocks, but it tickles away at the nerve that doesn't like to be unhinged, and it has a good ending to boot! If you are searching for something new in the sub-genre of zombie/infected siege movies you will be disappointed, but this is actually better than some of those bigger budgeted sub-genre movies. While it marks Clark out as someone British Horror fans might like to keep an eye on. 6.5/10
Plot basically finds a group of human guinea pigs enrolling for a two week trial at a remote research centre. They are to be injected with a new drug called Pro-9, and after their two week stay they will pocket a cool £2000 each. The group consists of the needy, the inquisitive, the bold and the stupid, and sure enough once night falls and the lock down commences, some of the participants get a reaction to the drug...
It follows the standard trajectory for such a set-up. Characters are introduced, we get to know them for half hour, you quickly learn who the A-Hole is, and then it's drug reaction time and we are thrust into murder death kill and locked in siege panic. Tis a time for heroes, maybe even some interesting revelations? Who will survive? If anyone? Maybe there's a twist in the tale as well?
For his debut feature film Ian Clark has played safe and utilised the low budget wisely. The pic shows him to have great promise in the horror genre, his keen sense of claustrophobic atmosphere is evident and carries the story well, and he knows how to construct a horror scene. He also gets more than solid performances from his lively cast, where Alex Reid (The Descent/Wilderness) is a reassuring presence.
It isn't over bloody, or even terrifying and full of boo jump shocks, but it tickles away at the nerve that doesn't like to be unhinged, and it has a good ending to boot! If you are searching for something new in the sub-genre of zombie/infected siege movies you will be disappointed, but this is actually better than some of those bigger budgeted sub-genre movies. While it marks Clark out as someone British Horror fans might like to keep an eye on. 6.5/10
Makes for rather depressing viewing
Leofwine_draca3 June 2016
THE FACILITY is another film about a medical trial gone wrong, in which a number of diverse characters are locked inside a medical research institute and tested with some new drugs which have unusual and unexpected side effects. This film has almost exactly the same story and execution as the American-made LAST EXPERIMENT, which was also disappointing.
I think the problem with such films is that they feel very loosely-plotted and predictable. The viewer knows from the very beginning that things are going to go violently wrong so the first half of the story, the set up, is very boring as a result. This film has a cheapness of look that's not helped by the clichéd blue filter used in all of the scenes to make the setting look cold and clinical.
Recognisable cast members are limited to Alex Reid (from THE DESCENT) and that's about it. The characters are thinly-drawn and quite unlikeable and that's even before the story gets going. And once things do kick off, they do so in a predictable way that remains predictable until the end. Sure, there's some gore and bloodshed here, but THE FACILITY is depressing more than anything else and certainly never horrific.
I think the problem with such films is that they feel very loosely-plotted and predictable. The viewer knows from the very beginning that things are going to go violently wrong so the first half of the story, the set up, is very boring as a result. This film has a cheapness of look that's not helped by the clichéd blue filter used in all of the scenes to make the setting look cold and clinical.
Recognisable cast members are limited to Alex Reid (from THE DESCENT) and that's about it. The characters are thinly-drawn and quite unlikeable and that's even before the story gets going. And once things do kick off, they do so in a predictable way that remains predictable until the end. Sure, there's some gore and bloodshed here, but THE FACILITY is depressing more than anything else and certainly never horrific.
Realistic horror
Gregorgreene26 June 2012
I saw this film premiere at the Edinburgh Film Festival. The film relates the story of a clinical trial that goes terribly wrong when the drug being tested produces horrific side effects. It's so refreshing so see a horror film firmly based on reality with a totally plausible story and no zombies, vampires, extraterrestrials, paranormal activity or monsters of any kind. The atmosphere and tensions in the isolated medical centre are well realised and the film shows little sign of its "micro-budget". Imaginative cinematography and sound design coupled with a very fast edit all help create an uneasy and claustrophobic world. There are slight flaws – not all the characters are full realised and the script is occasionally too verbose – but the team of NFTS graduates, who introduced Saturday's screening, have produced a very well crafted, disturbing and exciting film.
The facility
nickcarpenter2017 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The facility despite its micro budget and short length proves to be an actual entertaining movie that you feel could actually happen in real life and isn't to far fetched like the major budget movies being released these days.its the story about 8 strangers all going to a medical clinic to do some medical trials for some money and things go horribly wrong very quick.I went into this one expecting one of those terribly acted extremely cheap films made on a shoe-string budget you just turn off after 10 minutes because there down right disgraceful but i have to say i was surprised with this one.All of the cast put in some really top notch performances and really set the atmosphere to the film and the special effects were impressive as well but the script lacked a little and the film failed to make sense in some parts like were are the cellphones? I'm sure they owned them and brought them with them so why not call for help? and despite one of the characters having taken a placebo instead of the actual drug he fails to come up with the idea of leaving the facility and coming back with help and could of saved some lives in the end because there was an obvious escape route and in the film they actually do go outside only to return to the building. the writers could of done more to amp up the script and plot without costing them money but they failed to do so.despite this the film kept me interested and entertained for the 80 minutes it ran for and i enjoyed the old guy who sounds an awful lot like johnny Vegas.nice job well acted but could of been a lot better 6/10
A lack of imagination is this one's downfall
Red-Barracuda25 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Seven people arrive at a remote clinic where they have volunteered to be guinea pigs for a new drug. They think it will be an easy ride but it turns out there are unexpected horrendous side-effects. The guinea pigs turn into homicidal lunatics.
Featuring Aneurin Barnard who recently starred as David Bailey in We'll Take Manhattan, this is a picture that you cannot say doesn't do what you expect. I think that's the problem though. There isn't really anything unexpected in this flick, which wouldn't really matter but for the fact that a feature set solely in a clinic needs to bring something different to the table to stave off tedium. Guinea Pigs reminded me of last year's Stormhouse, which was another low-budget British horror film set within the confines of a secure building. That one was a military bunker and the threat was supernatural but the problems were the same, i.e. a lack of variety and a dull set-up. I can see how the limited sets allow for a cheap production with not much cost on set-design but the writers really need to be a bit more imaginative to make up for this. On the plus side, it's a movie that doesn't over-stay its welcome as it is pretty short. Brevity is a good thing. But, unfortunately, this one is a bit mediocre otherwise.
Featuring Aneurin Barnard who recently starred as David Bailey in We'll Take Manhattan, this is a picture that you cannot say doesn't do what you expect. I think that's the problem though. There isn't really anything unexpected in this flick, which wouldn't really matter but for the fact that a feature set solely in a clinic needs to bring something different to the table to stave off tedium. Guinea Pigs reminded me of last year's Stormhouse, which was another low-budget British horror film set within the confines of a secure building. That one was a military bunker and the threat was supernatural but the problems were the same, i.e. a lack of variety and a dull set-up. I can see how the limited sets allow for a cheap production with not much cost on set-design but the writers really need to be a bit more imaginative to make up for this. On the plus side, it's a movie that doesn't over-stay its welcome as it is pretty short. Brevity is a good thing. But, unfortunately, this one is a bit mediocre otherwise.
Not sure
bjjnedan1 June 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The Facility is about a group of people that are part of a drug trial. Unforeseen side effects make the first and only night of a 14 days trial mayhem.
Yeah, the drug induced guinea pig crazy people thing has been done. Yeah, there's nothing that makes this movie stand out from anything. But..., the simple fact that it was so..., simple, made it believable. I've never been a part of one of those trials but I have been on drugs that cause those kind of psychotically, aggressive, homicidal, suicidal feelings. So I can kind of understand how something like that could happen. This didn't happen. This was just a directors attempt to cause spite for big business pharmaceuticals. Which he failed. Overall, the acting was decent, it was actually a decent little film. It was just too short. This movie had some good things going on. Some good suspense building/built up, then it just ends by the director saying, "No one at Prosyntrex was prosecuted." That was it. I really wanted to like it better, but the way it ended just made it seem like the director just ran out of ideas and said f*** it.
Yeah, the drug induced guinea pig crazy people thing has been done. Yeah, there's nothing that makes this movie stand out from anything. But..., the simple fact that it was so..., simple, made it believable. I've never been a part of one of those trials but I have been on drugs that cause those kind of psychotically, aggressive, homicidal, suicidal feelings. So I can kind of understand how something like that could happen. This didn't happen. This was just a directors attempt to cause spite for big business pharmaceuticals. Which he failed. Overall, the acting was decent, it was actually a decent little film. It was just too short. This movie had some good things going on. Some good suspense building/built up, then it just ends by the director saying, "No one at Prosyntrex was prosecuted." That was it. I really wanted to like it better, but the way it ended just made it seem like the director just ran out of ideas and said f*** it.
Boring
LaverneandShirleysucks17 December 2020
Half the time you can't even see what the heck is going on because of the amateur directing, shaky camera angles and poor lighting. The characters are all unlikable so you don't give a crap what happens to any of them. If you're looking for horror or suspense, this film has neither. Pass.
Not bad, but a missed opportunity
bowmanblue1 January 2015
'The Facility' is about a group of middle-to-upper class people who volunteer to test a new drug called Pro9. If you can get over the fact that all but one appear far too well-to-do to feel the need to be human guinea pigs, then you have a reasonable premise for a horror/thriller movie.
Naturally, things go wrong. The drug makes people go crazy and look like they're suffering from extreme sunburn. I'm sure the writer wanted to convey a message about how bad pharmaceutical companies are. However, if that was the 'hidden message' then it's a little too well hidden.
What transpires plays out like a low budget zombie film (almost like a rough prequel to 28 Days Later). When the side effects start to show themselves in the test subjects, they just go crazy (think 'The Infected' from 28 Days Later) and, due to the 'sunburnt-effect' make-up, appear like zombies.
What's left is people running and hiding from their former colleagues all the way through it.
That wouldn't be so bad if the characters were a little more defined. However, half the test subjects are pretty unlikable and the others (even the good ones we're supposed to root for) are just too bland for us to be bothered about. The acting is as good as you can expect, but it isn't the actors' fault that they have so little to work with.
It's not the worst horror/thriller film out there, it just probably could have been a little better.
Naturally, things go wrong. The drug makes people go crazy and look like they're suffering from extreme sunburn. I'm sure the writer wanted to convey a message about how bad pharmaceutical companies are. However, if that was the 'hidden message' then it's a little too well hidden.
What transpires plays out like a low budget zombie film (almost like a rough prequel to 28 Days Later). When the side effects start to show themselves in the test subjects, they just go crazy (think 'The Infected' from 28 Days Later) and, due to the 'sunburnt-effect' make-up, appear like zombies.
What's left is people running and hiding from their former colleagues all the way through it.
That wouldn't be so bad if the characters were a little more defined. However, half the test subjects are pretty unlikable and the others (even the good ones we're supposed to root for) are just too bland for us to be bothered about. The acting is as good as you can expect, but it isn't the actors' fault that they have so little to work with.
It's not the worst horror/thriller film out there, it just probably could have been a little better.
Interesting film that could go either way.
jmbovan-47-16017329 May 2021
This dramatizes the events of a drug trial gone wrong. The film is rather interesting, but at the same time feels somewhat overdone with tropes of horror films. But at the same time it doesn't. If you like it, it's a good film. But if you don't, I can see where you would be annoyed by it. Thud has the feel of a mockumentary, sometimes creating that sense of tropes. Then it moves past that to a tensely plotted film.
Ever Try Guinea Pig??? It Tastes Like Chicken!
wandernn1-81-68327419 June 2020
Okay so 8 volunteers gather at a live in facility to do a trial on some experimental drug.
Obviously they better be getting paid a lot to do that. One would hope!!!
So a long drawn out mess as characters die one by one.......
None of the characters really have any redeeming qualities....
-1 Star for No redeeming qualities
The Doctors disappear and then the patients all turn on each other.
The ending really left little conclusion and was pretty disappointing. Really the ending was bad enough to give it a -1 Star.
Overall this movie, supposedly based on a true story but that's fake....
Was really not good.
3/10
Obviously they better be getting paid a lot to do that. One would hope!!!
So a long drawn out mess as characters die one by one.......
None of the characters really have any redeeming qualities....
-1 Star for No redeeming qualities
The Doctors disappear and then the patients all turn on each other.
The ending really left little conclusion and was pretty disappointing. Really the ending was bad enough to give it a -1 Star.
Overall this movie, supposedly based on a true story but that's fake....
Was really not good.
3/10
Don't miss this gem
Gods_Son16 July 2013
I stumbled upon this film by pure fluke. I had never seen any marketing material nor heard anything via word of mouth...I'm glad I found it though and I will not soon forget it.
The move is about a bunch of regular people who sign up to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial for some kind of pharmaceutical. They must stay in a facility during the trial and the facility is like a tiny hospital or clinic in the middle of absolutely nowhere....and this is where the film shines. The seclusion, the claustrophobia....a great atmosphere is set right from the beginning, reminiscent of classics such as The Thing and Alien.
The acting here is also top notch. Other reviews seem to pick on the story but I felt as though it was the lack of information that made this movie great, again reminiscent of classics that leave more to the imagination...This movie does not spoon feed you with details, and for that I felt like I was there apart of the madness.
The move is about a bunch of regular people who sign up to be guinea pigs in a clinical trial for some kind of pharmaceutical. They must stay in a facility during the trial and the facility is like a tiny hospital or clinic in the middle of absolutely nowhere....and this is where the film shines. The seclusion, the claustrophobia....a great atmosphere is set right from the beginning, reminiscent of classics such as The Thing and Alien.
The acting here is also top notch. Other reviews seem to pick on the story but I felt as though it was the lack of information that made this movie great, again reminiscent of classics that leave more to the imagination...This movie does not spoon feed you with details, and for that I felt like I was there apart of the madness.
Dreadful film!
Victor-fitforlife26 June 2019
An absolute dirge of a film! Slow moving, no thrills, no shocks, no terror, no point!
A sheer waste of my time and I will never ever get the near two hours I wasted on it, back again.
Possibly the worst "horror" film I have ever seen.
Impressive debut
carolshelleykeats26 June 2012
I wasn't quite sure what to expect from Ian Clark's first feature film, being familiar with his classic shorts, particularly the heart-warming 'Def ' and 'Jenny and the Worm'. This tense, tightly- controlled movie focuses on a drugs trial that goes horrifically wrong, with seven 'guinea pigs' from various backgrounds and professions coming together to test the drug Pro 9. The resulting tragic consequences lead to escalating tension as each participant realises they may be next in line to react violently to the drug. Blood and gore is in evidence here but never overdone. In fact, suggestion is all, and Clark's intelligent script, clever camera-work and the omission of overblown music bullying the emotions, allow the viewer's imagination free rein. Claustrophobic scenes of characters in close-up in tight spaces add to the tension, and although there are familiar and unfamiliar elements from the horror genre this is a new and refreshing angle on a neglected subject. There are some loose ends, there's some less than convincing acting at times, but 'Guinea Pigs' is a fine example of what can be achieved on a low budget. An impressive debut, and an exciting foretaste of Ian Clark's next film venture. I, for one, can't wait.
Good acting
sammarchant3 December 2020
I was invested in the movie the entire time it was gripping, and at times suspenseful. Seemed like a small budget for movie but the acting was surprisingly good. Could of made it a bit more gruesome I think , but overall a decent horror.
Dire
cc-435-94646428 May 2016
My first review here. It was shown on "Horror" last night, first time on UK TV. Cast? Generic cardboard cut outs (Asian guy, studious, Welsh guy serious/flirty, Old guy who has been in medical experiments before, a journalist, an Irish woman who is connected to a drugs company, giggly 19 year old dyed blonde girl, preening male model type). Some compare it to 28 days. Wrong. The script on this film was dire. The premise borderline asinine (why not just walk two miles to the nearest road?) I am only here as I dozed off and missed the ending. The Old guy was zonked out, the Welsh guy nervously surveying the spy cameras - the Irish woman smoking and the journalist worrying. What happened next?
Good but not genuine
vbcoder25 May 2013
The story is almost a cliché of many preceded movies. The paradigm of getting rid of a group one by one has been used excessively. Blood scenes were made with good taste without having violence that we used to see as a stereotype of this category.
Disconnecting the internet and phones were an exaggerating idea since patients had access to the whole facility. Also the feasibility of leaving the facility but insisting on staying at it were unbelievable.
Last, but not least, the medical background of volunteers is questionable. It requires lots of knowledge even for physicians to be aware of all that.
The ending was good, but the whole experience was below satisfaction.
Disconnecting the internet and phones were an exaggerating idea since patients had access to the whole facility. Also the feasibility of leaving the facility but insisting on staying at it were unbelievable.
Last, but not least, the medical background of volunteers is questionable. It requires lots of knowledge even for physicians to be aware of all that.
The ending was good, but the whole experience was below satisfaction.
Competent acting, semi-professional direction--wasted.
adj-699-88774630 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
There are many British films that center around a group trapped in some dire situation wherein the directors rely on the talent and script/story line rather than special FX or exotic locale/scenery to craft a gripping yarn.
Nicolas Roeg's incredible BBC-produced film, "Two Deaths" comes to mind. Written by Stephen Dobyns and adapted by Dobyns and Alan Scott, I consider it to be the quintessential British drama and an example of the power of a great script, conscientious, detailed direction and powerful, penetrating delivery by great actors--all occurring in a single room.
For 'The Facility', we have yet another British writer-director who seems intent on crafting such a typically British, Roeg-like, limited-set drama while lacking the skill in either capacity to make it work.
Granted, the cast doesn't have a Braga or a Malahide or a Gambon, but the cast is clearly talented--the acting is generally sincere and studied, insofar as the hideous script allows them to be.
With all of the low budget and/or Film School Project escapades released these days that have 'writer-directors', one would think the lesson learned would be that one is actually doing oneself a great disservice by trying to do both--someone who has skill and potential in directing is stuck with a horrible script, or vice versa.
Ian Clark, Writer-Director of 'The Facility' seems like he might eventually have a career as a director--generally his 'timing' is good--but how can we really tell? A competent director can often take a lousy screenplay and make it shine, but that hasn't happened here.
That said, there were 'moments', but, while avoiding any spoilers, the film is predictable, shallow and ultimately wanting and unsatisfying.
If I were to advise Mr. Clark, I would suggest he concentrate on directing, while searching through the no doubt thousands of excellent screenplays out there for some meaty material he can sink his teeth into, and forget about writing. Although every writer dreams of directing his/her own creation, it virtually never works well, and this is yet another case in point.
.
Nicolas Roeg's incredible BBC-produced film, "Two Deaths" comes to mind. Written by Stephen Dobyns and adapted by Dobyns and Alan Scott, I consider it to be the quintessential British drama and an example of the power of a great script, conscientious, detailed direction and powerful, penetrating delivery by great actors--all occurring in a single room.
For 'The Facility', we have yet another British writer-director who seems intent on crafting such a typically British, Roeg-like, limited-set drama while lacking the skill in either capacity to make it work.
Granted, the cast doesn't have a Braga or a Malahide or a Gambon, but the cast is clearly talented--the acting is generally sincere and studied, insofar as the hideous script allows them to be.
With all of the low budget and/or Film School Project escapades released these days that have 'writer-directors', one would think the lesson learned would be that one is actually doing oneself a great disservice by trying to do both--someone who has skill and potential in directing is stuck with a horrible script, or vice versa.
Ian Clark, Writer-Director of 'The Facility' seems like he might eventually have a career as a director--generally his 'timing' is good--but how can we really tell? A competent director can often take a lousy screenplay and make it shine, but that hasn't happened here.
That said, there were 'moments', but, while avoiding any spoilers, the film is predictable, shallow and ultimately wanting and unsatisfying.
If I were to advise Mr. Clark, I would suggest he concentrate on directing, while searching through the no doubt thousands of excellent screenplays out there for some meaty material he can sink his teeth into, and forget about writing. Although every writer dreams of directing his/her own creation, it virtually never works well, and this is yet another case in point.
.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
