Cell Count

2012 "It's what's on the inside that counts...."
3.7| 1h36m| NR| en
Details

Russell Carpenter reluctantly admits his wife Sadie into an experimental treatment facility for her life threatening disease. While locked in this prison like surrounding they, along with 6 others, are unknowingly subjected to a cure that might just be worse than the disease itself

Director

Producted By

Wooden Frame Productions

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Also starring Haley Talbot

Also starring Laura Duyn

Reviews

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.
Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.
Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
Michael Ledo I enjoyed the horror/mystery/thriller aspect of the film, even some of the plot details. The problem is the execution was horrendous. Sadie (Haley Talbot) has a deadly new disease. Her doctor (Christopher Toyne) claims he can cure her in three weeks if she submits to an experimental procedure in a remote secure location. In order for her husband to be able to go with her, he agrees to contract the disease and undergo treatment. The doctor has had the disease and has been cured.The facility has that sanitary institutionalized feel to it. There are several other patients there also. You immediately realize things are not what they seem and you want to know more about the cure.The acting was acceptable for a "B" horror film. The script needed some polish. For effect, the camera was a bit jerky, for that live feel and during crisis scenes, the voices were removed which I found took away from the film more than added. Sometimes more is more.F-bombs, sex, male nudity.
afiowa27 Don't let a decent cut trailer suck you into watching this stupid horror movie because it is a pathetic waste of your valuable time, and today especially, your hard to come by money, at least mine is. And to all you crummy loner bloggers and so-called critics out there acting as cheerleaders for this flop -- I'll never believe one word you say again anywhere. Where's the Roger Ebert review? I'd tell you more about the dumb story they attempted if it had anything worthwhile or memorable to say or add to this genre which it doesn't. In fact, what I'd like to do is get my money back. Maybe I should send an invoice to the producer, the director, and the all those lame critics for the all time I wasted watching this flop and the time I spent writing this.
J. Davis First off this is my favorite sub-genre of Horror ever since the first Saw film. Any time there is people that wake up somewhere strange imprisoned by any means(medically quarantined in this case) I can't wait to watch it. What is most annoying about this is the wasted potential. They had set up a great premise for all kinds of horrible things to happen & it makes the viewer hang in there waiting to see these things but they never happen. What does happen is a bunch of 20 second scenes in no certain order that make absolutely no real sense. In the second half of the film it seems like whoever cut this dropped the scenes on the floor & just cut it in the order they landed. Of course then there is the final act that leaves the viewer with the same questions they had in the first half unanswered. They had all of the ingredients but failed to use most of them to their advantage, kind of like my cooking. If you do decide to check this out remember to keep your expectations low. 4/10
hopla68 I have read a number of reviews for this movie. All these reviews were positive based on the fact that this is an independent movie with a small budget, no name actors and an inexperienced director and that if you take all that into consideration it is really a good movie...Well what happens if you take all these things out of the equation, do you still have a movie that is worth your time or not. This is - in my opinion- the question to be asked; otherwise you are left with the feeling you have as a parent when your child performs at a school play; " they really did their best". Now I don't get me wrong, by the time my son performs in a school play I will be very forgiving and proud, i am not forgiving for a movie that takes at least 90 mins of my time and doesn't give enough back for that investment.Which is of course the case here.The plot is simple, a handful of strangers with a " disease" ( its never explained which disease this is) are selected for a cure in a facility with questionable treatments by a scary doctor. Of course things go wrong, the cure has side effects and people get killed.This is basically not only the short version but all there is to tell. The first images of a husband at the bed of his dying wife and the choices presented to him ( either you keep trying to pay the bills to watch her die here or sign her up for experimental treatment) are powerful and set the mood for things to come; realistic choices.But the moment the couple arrives in the facility things go bad - not only for the couple but also for the viewer- the first mistake is to make the next scene " 3 weeks later" ?? I mean, what happened in the previous weeks, why does the husband have a scar, why is the wife suddenly better, who are those other people? What follows is a collection of loosely tied scenes. Couple of standouts ( there is an interesting vomit scene and you see a flash of the bug like creature the evul doctor uses as a cure, well a flash, more like two legs)but there is no cohesion. The facility - including a resident evil like promo that is played for the, well lets call them inmates, which is cool- is flat and not much of a background. Its the porn set mantra; every scene looks the same because they have just one background.Acting and dialog feels unnatural at best and just plain bad at the worst and because things "just" happen without any explanation or fleshed out background story individual scenes can be judged just as that and the movie crashes time and time again.So is this a recommended movie? I read reviews which compared it to early David Cronenberg; don't be fooled, it doesn't even come close to his work. An other review compared it to the equally flawed " Bane" which comes closer to the truth. The movie does have its merits and some good ideas behind it but the sum of acting, plot, no budget backgrounds and disjointed scenes makes it a chore for everyone watching it with half a brain. The ending which gives you one of the Baldwin Brothers for a cameo is half baked and lacks any form of logic; pleads for a sequel that hopefully never comes. Making a movie on a small budget must have its difficulties, but a coherent plot is the very least I expect from any movie.

Similar Movies to Cell Count