Quebec_Dragon This British horror film is unusual in a few aspects. It starts by showing the end (or is it?) of the story. It has the main character, Nick, as a narrator, who's more often a commentator who hits the pause button (freeze-frame) when he makes a comment. Nick is considered criminally insane because of the way his lover died 4 years ago in an abandoned asylum, but Nick insists it was due to supernatural causes (involving a weird chair). Early in the film, Nick admits he can be the only one who did it although he doesn't remember doing it. An old professor, his assistant and two students have the "genius" idea to bring back the supposedly criminally insane Nick to the asylum where the murder was committed, to study him. Right there, I had a problem believing such a dumb idea could actually happen.The "devil's chair" in the abandoned asylum is a sinister-looking chair with a skull, initially inoffensive, which "probes" people (creepiest effects of the movie) before shunting them off to another version of the asylum with a demon-skulled tentacled monster roaming. I thought sometimes it looked freakish, sometimes amateurish. The acting was unequal, but I think it might have been intentional. The pompous old professor was atrocious in his line delivery. The main character/narrator was actually good playing it serious, troubled, intense, sometimes mean, channelling Jason Statham. The others were OK, except the brown-haired assistant that was also bad, but nowhere near the level of the professor. There were jarring changes in the tone of the movie with the main character actually admonishing the viewer once. The "normal" version of the asylum was undermined by the irrational, sometimes corny, behaviour of the characters, which in a way got eventually explained. The "other" version of the asylum was sometimes unnerving with interesting cinematography.However, it's the last act (last 20 minutes or so) that was really horrifying with its final twist that I liked but that might frustrate others. For low-budget horror, it does try to be somewhat different but ends up a mixed-bag. I wondered what messages the creators were trying to convey if anything. One of them might be that the true horror doesn't lie in supernatural shenanigans but in the human psyche. Another might be simply what the main character spews out angrily at the viewer near the end. I don't think I particularly liked this movie, but I found it positively peculiar nevertheless.Rating: 6 out of 10 (Good)

gregkae I do appreciate the effort but a pair of suspenders have more suspense than this rotten egg of death. The story evolves around an evil chair adorned with a skull and placed conveniently (probably by some deranged carpenter) in a desolate building, a former asylum. To top it off the main character - a mental patient - continuously delivers a voice-over with a lisp which I believe he suffers from, listening to which is as thrilling as a boat ride on dry land.Believe me you've seen it done before and better (Session 9 anyone?), don't punish yourself by watching the "Chair". I dosed off countless times which was about the most refreshing thing about the whole experience.

moonpig82 I was pretty disappointed with this one. The story sounded interesting but after a poor beginning with ridiculous editing and 2 characters I couldn't really care less about I thought about switching it off. I stuck with it to the surprisingly good ending but I certainly wouldn't bother watching it again. I know horror movies are supposed to be far fetched and most of the time it is easy to forget how silly the plots can be but I couldn't do that with The Devil's Chair. I just couldn't believe that a man declared criminally insane and charged with murdering his girlfriend would be let out after just 4 years for a field trip back to the place where the murder is committed. And that 4 other people would voluntarily go with him. Oh and this place seems to be in the middle of nowhere. The acting is decent enough (although I did get distracted sometimes by the fact that the actor playing Nick resembles a potato). The special effects aren't bad either but the pacing is so slow. I really struggled to sit through the first hour. As well as it being boring in places, I found the narration really irritating. Especially when the picture would suddenly freeze and Nick would provide some comment. Were these supposed to be funny? Because they weren't. The only reason I rated it as high as 4/10 was because of the ending. The twist at the ending is predictable but that doesn't stop it being violent, gruesome and disturbing - exactly as horror should be. It was the only part of the movie that provoked a feeling in me other than boredom or irritation. It was pretty uncomfortable to sit through and watch and was extremely well done. But is it worth watching the movie just for the last 15 minutes? Personally I don't think so. If you are into blood and gore the movie delivers on that front but unfortunately not really on any other.

Bifrostedflake I only bought this film because it was on sale for £3, I didn't expect much from it but strangely I enjoyed it. That's not to say I thought it was a good movie, to be honest I thought it was a pretty bad movie but I still got a kick from watching it.I think as long as you don't expect a brilliant plot, you can enjoy this film. There's a couple of overblown gore scenes but it kinda feels like a cheap 80's horror film which, if you're a fan of those, is nicely nostalgic.Because they haven't over thought the plot in an attempt to seem clever, you can tell what's going to happen from about five minutes in, but the acting in the film is surprisingly decent & the effects are pretty good to boot. I liked it a whole lot more than the likes of 'Shrooms' but then this film was never going to be as good as 'Severance'. Although if you consider they only had 2 weeks to prepare this film, with only 3 days to write the script, then they did a great job.I'll be interested in seeing the other films these guys have made to see if they can do any better.