Foreverisacastironmess Okay, here goes, I thought Matt Stasi was decent enough in the lead role as the terminally naive young doctor/psychologist guy who really would have been much better off just minding his own damn business! His performance was very weak, but not so awful that I didn't feel for the poor guy a little in the eerie final scene-the only one in the entire film in which he truly emotes! He was a cute one, I like that ratty look! I thought the monster of this picture, the Harvester, was a very cool-looking beast. I liked the effect with the eyes. The design of it wasn't exactly awesome or anything, but to me it still came off as more effective and threatening than some cgi creation in any given SyFy original. The thing didn't get up to that much, but what it did was a pretty terrible fate to be constantly looming throughout. ::: The setting was really good, I always love it in horror movies when the last lonely refuge of the criminally insane is corrupted or twisted in some way. I liked the weird visuals of the place. A lot of the lighting was strangely distorted and gave an almost surreal tone. Although I've seen it done a lot better, I think the setting is the best thing about this film, and is the main element that makes it a worthwhile and enjoyable watch for me. But alas, although the location had lots of potential for great scary atmospherics, they never made all that much use of it. And that's the big problem here, nothing's ever that strong-it's all so tame and slow-paced and it never quite takes off and overcomes its limitations. And the story never goes anywhere except exactly where you'd expect it to. And everyone seems to be saying the same things over and over:this place is evil, bad stuff going' down up in here, get out while you can! And that sameness does get a little grating after not so long. And the only thing that I did find genuinely dumb and that bugged me was when Bruce Payne's effectively villainous character speaks some vague nonsense of how the deaths of the sacrificial victims have to be timed so that they die just as the Harvester stomps up to brand them and claim their souls-which makes no sense at all, seeing as it's clearly the infernal act of the soul-stealing itself that kills them in the first place! And the doctor at the prologue at the beginning and presumably "James" weren't even evil! I just thought that stuff was plain sloppy and should have been left right out. ::: Everything sure looked very slapped together and choppy. The movie was low budget and it showed. But I actually like the film's cheapness, I think it lets you focus better on the its strongest point-a rather effective and subtle foreboding atmosphere of dread. And it does deliver quite well on the suspense. And it never drags and becomes such a total bore as to bore you to tears. It's merely an alright, fine kind of movie, I used to like to chill out to it late at night years ago when they had it on the Horror Channel. Ultimately the flick just isn't good enough, and that's probably a shame because it has its good points. It was entertaining enough and had a good creepy setup, even if they fail to do it justice. It falls flat, mainly because the pieces, while technically fitting together, just don't fit very well. Far indeed from the best, but nor would I say that "Hellborn" belongs with the very worst. Later!

thoms230 After finishing this movie, I cried. That's it; I actually cried. I was in physical pain.It's like watching "A Serbian Film," not for the gauntlet of its obscenity, but its sheer badness.Bruce Payne is at least competent as usual in his role as the smarmy villain. Besides that, there are literally no redeeming qualities. The acting is terrible. The plotting is painful. There is no climax; there is no real tension; there is no movie. Philip J Jones has succeeded in creating the anti-movie. In this otherwise auspicious of nights, I have suffered far worse than any man should. Save yourself; do not watch this movie.

FreonTrip Because others have gone to the trouble of summarizing the plot, I'd like to mention a few points about this film. There may be spoilers here; I don't care enough to filter them out.Given the film's low budget, the creature design was quite good. It's actually nice to see a direct-to-video horror film that's not slathered with awful CGI. Unfortunately the digital film quality's quite grainy in places, and it's most noticeable in the well-lit white halls of the asylum.Ridiculous lighting design plagues parts of this film, to say nothing of the variations in the passage of time. I understand the director might have been trying to simulate dementia, but in order for this to be effective consistent time flow needed to be established. As-is, it merely seems amateurish.Plot twists were numerous but consistently predictable. I neither had a doubt in my mind of the identity of the robed cultists, nor of the fact that some kind of lame evil-trumps-good development would surface at the end.This may seem like quibbling, but characters in this film reliably fail to employ any kind of common sense. First of all, regulatory commissions would be all over a mental health center that unilaterally declared all patient and employee deaths cardiac arrest-induced. Why would the head psychiatrist also be capable of performing autopsies? Why wasn't a plot point made of these impressive qualifications, or of his introduction to his odd choice of religion? What's the background? What's supposed to make us care about anyone in this? And just as importantly, who in their right mind would go through the introduction to the place, see everything that was so frighteningly wrong with it, and then conclude that it was still a fine place to pursue a residency? This film didn't even respect its characters enough to give their intelligence the benefit of the doubt.Bottom line: There's a legion of movies out there that are more worthy of your time and attention than this. See any of those, but start with the original Wicker Man if you haven't already seen it.

Claudio Carvalho James Bishop (Matt Stasi) goes to a `mental illness facility' for a medical residence assignment with Dr. McCort (Bruce Paynes). There, he realizes that many interns are being killed by `The Ripper', who takes their souls to the devil, in a cult promoted by Dr. McCort. This story is so absurd and imbecile that it is impossible to write a summary. The dialogs are so ridiculous, specially when the character of Helen, the blonde fiancé of James Bishop arrives in the asylum, that it is almost unbelievable that a writer has had the courage to include them in a screenplay. And what about the return of James to the hospital to bring the files of the dead patients? And the cast, composed of ham actors and actresses? Honestly, I do not know what or who is the worst in this film: the screenplay, the director or the cast. The correct answer certainly is all of them. I saw this flick on cable television, and I am astonished how can a producer spend money in such a garbage. This horror movie becomes very funny considering the absurd of the plot. My vote is three.Title (Brazil): `Demônio' (`Devil')