"Session 9"

[Fearless Freep]

Just watched this one last night

Anyone else realize that, below the well done direction and production, that the actual end of the movie had no connection with the events leading up to the end?

[Ash]

I've only seen bits & pieces of this film so I don't have a concrete opinion yet.
I'm gonna have to go out & rent this one sometime soon.
Skaboi is a die-hard fan of this and has raved about it several times here on the board.
(I'm pretty sure it was him)

Do a search for Session 9.
I'm pretty sure it's had a couple threads written about it.

[trekgeezer]

This is an excellently spooky movie.

[Fearless Freep]

***Spoilers ***

I thought it was an "excellently spooky movie", up until the end when it all resolved and I realized that not much of the spookiness actually connected to what happened in the end.  One thing to do in a scary movie that tries to keep up the suspense with misdirection and uncertainy and  a twist is that, one you know the answer, work backwards and see how what came before setup the resolution and how it led you astray.  With this movie, once I knew who it was and what he did, I looked back and asked "how did we get here?" and the problem I found was that..we didn't  Biggest example was the actual Session tapes..they created tension but actually didn't figure into the plot resolution in anyway, other than as a misdirection to he viewer.  In a good suspense movie you should be able to look back at the misdirections and false trails and go "on, now I know how *that* lead me off but now I know how it *really* played into the story" and in this case it's easy to see how certain story elements (like the Session tapes, like the young hoodlums, like the phone call to th ex-girlfriend) were there to create uncertainty, but in the end they meant *absolutely nothing* to how the story resolved.  I spent 98 minutes thinking I was watching a really good movie and wondering where it would go...and the last two minutes feeling I'd really been ripped off.

[Neville]

One of the creepiest movies ever. I once watched it at night with my sister and she would stop at some point because she couldn't take it any longer.

True, the ending is sort of uh?, but I don't have any problem with that. A must see.

[Mr_Vindictive]

*spoilers*


Yep, Ash, I'm the die hard fan of this flick.

The ending for me, is the prefect icing on what is an absolutely fantastic film.  The tapes give insight into what is actually happening to Gordon.  Either he has another personality or he is actually possessed.  It could be one of Mary's personalities that possessed him, or he could just be losing his mind...the film never presents a solid answer to that.

Personally, I like to think that Gordon had another personality (or personalities) and that his inital visit to the asylum awoke it.  The tapes do provide a bit of a red herring in that it has you asking wether Mary is still alive and is going around killing the crew.  Even when the tapes turn out to be just an object of misdirection, they give the viewer insight into what's happening with Gordon.  Everything in the film works perfectly for me in that respect.

The very end of the film with Gordon and his daughter....and the choking noises......truly haunting even to this day.  That is my main reason for recommending the film I believe.  I've never seen a film that had that much lasting power over me, other than Session 9.

[loyal1]

Fearless...

I have to disagree with your view of the movie in how nothing seemed to relate to one another or was just thrown in to throw us off.

My take on this movie was not just about "who done it"  But a psychological look into the weaknesses and fears of ALL of the men and how they interact and handle it all.  One has a fear of the dark, young and inexperienced, another has a weakness for money, another is vindictive cause one of theguys stole his girlfriend (Hank stole Carruso's girl..that is reason for call. and why he wanted to talk to her.  He had it in for Hank)  He also fears losing biz.  The other is dealing with his spousal abuse.  The other has a weakness for curiousity and the darkside (remember story he told in beginning...to the point he becomes obsessed.

We are take on a ride of these weaknesses/fears unfolding and eventually their distrust for each other.

In the mean time the session tapes were playing...and they have a lot to do with the movie...it is a foreshadowing of what is to come to fruition with Gordon.  One of the fears/weakness rang true and above all others.  To find that Gordon didn't just committ spousal abuse...he murdered his own wife and daughter, and his collegues.  Much he hallucenated.  Does he have multiple personalities?  Is there a dark side we don't know?  Listen again to the tapes if you can..you will see why it is called session 9.

I did not feel ripped off at all.  I liked the pysh aspect of it and how these men dealt with each other...how their relationship started and unfolded...how that very place brought out the worst in them.  You question everyone, because when it comes down to it...is there really anyone that can truly be trusted.  You'll never know until you are faced with conditions that bring out your best...or worst.

[Neville]

SPOILERS

The way I see it, the asylum is an EVIL place. It slowly works on the people who work there, and step by step it it destroys them. This doesn't mean there's anything supernatural in it, it simply broughts the worst in people. The tapes are a red herring, true, but there are also important for understanding that.

[Fearless Freep]

The way I see it...

The problem is...in order to see it that way, you have to make up stuff that isn't in the movie.  A lot of possible explanations work like that, you can extroplate what you think would make it make more sense, but that extrapolation is based on wanting the stroy to make sense.

One way to look at it is to look at how the events in the movie affected the other events in the movie, or not.  A lot of the stuff in the movie worked to make it more suspenseful for the *viewer* but didn't have any impact in the internal story for the characters.  Case in point, the session tapes.  They provided atmosphere and creepiness and such for the *viewer* but when it came down to it, nobody but one character heard  the tapes, and his actions and what he heard and what was on the tapes ended up making not a bit of difference to the actual characters *in* the movie nor in how the story unfolded.  (Especially  the final 'Session 9' tape, because nobody heard it play; that was simple tension building for the viewer, but there was really no connection between Mary and Gordon, so the fact that the tape of Mary's last session played while everything else fell apart was ultimately a tension device for the viewer, not the story) .  Most of the events ended up like that.  You can't look at the final five minutes or so of the movie and see "ah...ha... Gordon was led to do this because of that (which happened earlier in the movie)"  Heck, mpst of what made Gordon who he was happened before the movie anyway and had to be explained by Phil

I don't mind a movie that makes me think about what's going on; I don't like a movie that makes me have to make stuff up to make sense of what really isn't there to cover bad writing.

[ulthar]

It's an interesting question: is it a requisite for good story telling to have the viewer/reader OUTSIDE the story or can they be an active part of it?  Can the viewer/reader "interact" with the characters in some way?

I don't know why, but as I read your post, "A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner was brought to my mind.  I don't think much of anything in that story happens to the characters - they are there to provide narrative more or less.  The whole story is written to manipulate the suspense of the reader, and as I recall, it is quite effective.  And, the final punch is provided by an intuitive leap by the reader.

I have not seen SESSION 9, but I do find this discussion interesting.

[loyal1]

I actually like that it didn't really spell anything out for you.  I don't feel that it necessarily means "bad writing".  It could have been done so many different ways to spell it all out for you and make you go "aha"  I like this movie the same way I liked Cube...it was a psychological unfolding of men/woman brought together in unusual and even life threatening situations.

The biggest fear of all is not those that are doing all this (i.e, the makers of the Cube or the dangerous elements of the Cube, or the asylum or whether it's possining these men, is Mary alive or a ghost?)  All of that is completely irrelevant and not the true dangers...the true danger lies in ourselves.  Our own minds and fears.  We don't truly know ourselves as well as we think we do.  And if that is the case...those insecurities take over where you imagine and have distrust in those you NEED to trust.

Gordon's "session 9" is much like Mary's "session 9"...for that is when the truth of what really happened comes to light.  As the each session's intensity progresses...so does the intensity of all the men and their fears distrust towrds one another.  

I respect your opinion and you have some valid points, however my taste doesn't feel that good writing has to have a solid connection with everything.  There are many good books/stories where I could take out events and characters that are really not needed...but yet add some depth to the story itself.  Or even to the main character in how he deals with the others and situations/events.  And as for the session tapes, being irrelevant just to make it more "creepy"  yes it does do that...it gives a feeling of what that place represents,  It brings creepiness and unsettling feeling of what the human mind is capable of...to what legnths it goes when some horrific event happens.  Much like what happened to our friend gordon...he killed his wife and kid and went on with life as if they were still alive.  He believed it...his mind could not come to terms that he killed them and built a whole facade around him.  This had to happen before the movie started.  This was the whole point.  He was insane before they even got there..and no one, not even himself knew that.  

I think it was well written and didn't go to the typical hollywood "aha" or some paranormal possession or ghost thing.  Like it was the asylum that made the worst in them shine through...it was all ready within them, it just helped bring it forth through their own imaginings and distrust, and weaknesses. Nothing more, nothing less.

[loyal1]

sorry, accidental dupe post of previous

[Menard]

I just simply refer to this film as 'Session Red Herring'. It is a spooky and suspenseful film, but the conclusion is a serious letdown. Perhaps some of you are right about how evil is suppose to play into this, but I personally feel that is reading too much into the story. They had what appeared to be a good story, but nowhere to go with it. The session 9 tapes just came off to me as the primary red herring. I would, however, recommend this to someone who has not seen it if they really want to get creeped out during a movie.

[loyal1]

I agree there...I don't think there was any outside evil or ghosts or any of that stuff...I think the fears and evil and insanity and mistrust lies within humans...ousrselves.  And when those weaknesses/insecurities surface...we are the true enemy...to each other, but more ourselves.  Gordon was his own worst fear and enemy.

That is what I liked about the ending.

And the tapes for me wasn't just "red herring"  It was a foreshadowing of what the mind did to Gordon, and session 9 is when both Mary and Gordon discover the truth of what really happened.

[Fearless Freep]

It's an interesting question: is it a requisite for good story telling to have the viewer/reader OUTSIDE the story or can they be an active part of it? Can the viewer/reader "interact" with the characters in some way?

I wish Nathan would chime in because he's very big on story elements and how they work :)

I tend to think that the events in the story should relate to the characters in the story.  The story telling mechanism can be used to reveal or conceal information from the observer of the story for dramatic impact, but I think you should be careful (as a storyteller) that the story is internally consistant and sensible within the rules of the story.

I good counter-example would be "Below"

*more spoilers*

Below used flashbacks effectively to tell parts of the story out of sequence, but it was done in a story telling fashon to reveal to the viewer events that some characters knew but others didn't.  (And the characters that *didn't* know represented 'us' in the story).  In the ed ou were left with  the question of "was it a ghost of the dead captain or the guilt of his killers?" and the movie could leave it ambigious and let you wonder and try to figure it out because the story work internally and the actions of the characters were based on what they were experiencing and you were along for the ride.  The mechanics of the storytelling were for the viewer, but the story was for the characters.  An effective use of storytelling, I thought.

By contrast, Session 9 was, as Menard said, "Session Red Herring" in that too much of the story was for the viewer, not for the characters.  As a viewer, the session tapes built tension, but they had no impact on the story because they had no affect in the characters.  The only character to hear the tapes was Mike, and Gordon killed Mike simply because Gordon was nuts, like he killed everyone else, so the fact that Mike heard the tapes meant nothing to the story, only to the viewer as a tension device.  (And for what it's worth, the Session 9 tape was disappointing because it was faily easy to see coming what role  'Simon' was playing in Mary's insanity, and I really expected something more interesting out of the final tape so listening to the final tape was an exercise in "well I saw this coming, but you gave it such a buildup that I thought you had something more in mind"   Which was a letdown because "Simon's" actions were either because "Simon" was sadistic or more likely that Mary was being abused; Gordon's problem was that he was under a lot of stress and lashed out and the sense of guilt pushed him over.)