"She spoke to me, I think she was trying to tell me who stabbed her." When ER nurse Kaitlyn (Zea) is helping to try and save a young stabbing victim's life she begins to talk to her. Kaitlyn then begins to see the victim's memories and tries find the person who stabbed the young girl. This is a hard movie to review. The idea is actually pretty neat, the acting isn't terrible but the big problem is that it keeps repeating itself over and over. It seems like a 20 minute segment that they keep re-writing. That said I actually kinda liked it and it kept me interested the whole time. The only way to describe this is that it is a movie based off the TV show "Medium". If you liked that show then this is a movie for you. The best part hands down though is the twist ending and like some movies the ending actually makes you like the movie more then you would have. Worth watching for the ending. Overall, a very OK movie with a neat twist at the end. I give it a B.
24 Reviews
Brilliant story horrible direction
mariobad44415 February 2012
The story/idea of this psychological thriller is fantastic. That said, the directors made a complete mess out of it. I understand it was a low budget movie, but they had a great story and could have utilized the direction of this movie much better. Acting was alright. however, It was slow and boring. I almost stopped watching it halfway through nevertheless somehow made it to the end. The ending gives you some "InSight". It leaves you with quite a few scenarios that might have happened. The overall movie did give me a bit of a cringe, dark and sad feeling. I was gonna give it a 1/10 then notched up another +4 for the ending.
Unexpected ending ... but not in a good way
pdlhw10 September 2012
In the movies, the idea of crossing spirits or visions between two people that are experiencing death is not new, but sometimes is effective like in this case. it looks like the main characters are well defined and this is not cause the script. It happens because the acting is good enough. The problem begins when a good idea have not a good development and the ending it is not well justified. Even till close to the end you can think you are watching an average movie and that it was not a waist of time. But when the justifications of almost everything you suspected are shown just with images, if you were awake, you realize that there are loose ends and that makes you feel you saw a crappy movie. The idea is good but it is not well finished. Natalie Zea is correct in her role as well as Sean Patrick Flanery. It is always a pleasure to see Veronica Cartwright's acting but her role is small. If you don't have anything else to do, look for something better than this movie.
A great thriller not easily forgotten!
dimoulas20 February 2012
InSight is not a film that is easily forgotten nor brushed over. It starts off with some pretty extreme circumstances, we learn through fast cuts and dialogue that a girl named Allison Parks has been brutally attacked and we don't know why. Neither does the main character in the film, Kaitlyn, who plays one of the nurses trying to save Allison's life, as she is suffering from multiple stab wounds. Kaitlyn thinks for a moment that Allison is trying to communicate with her in some way, but before Kaitlyn can find out much, a defibrillator shocks Allison and she dies. The electricity travels through Allison's body and knocks out Kaitlyn, who then begins to see memories from Allison's life or so we are lead to believe for much of the film.
The uniqueness of InSight is how in which the story is told. Methodically, as slowly we learn more and less at the same time. I imagine it's hard for an audience to piece together what is real and what is only in Kaitlyn's mind, and I imagine that's the whole point. We struggle as the main character does to try and figure out whether Allison's murder was a random killing or something more. Along the way we are introduced to a skeptical detective, Kaitlyn's sick mother, a sleazy psychiatrist, and Allison's ex-boyfriend, all of these characters add to the mystery. None of them confirm for the audience on which end of the spectrum the story will end. Whether or not this was just a random killing and Kaitlyn is just hallucinating these memories, or there's something more to this murder, and Kaitlyn is the only one who can figure it out.
Richard Gabai directs this thriller in a way that allows the audience to piece-by-piece figure things out with the characters. By the end it's really up for interpretation what the truth is. If you see this with a friend, you will be discussing it long after the credits roll.
The uniqueness of InSight is how in which the story is told. Methodically, as slowly we learn more and less at the same time. I imagine it's hard for an audience to piece together what is real and what is only in Kaitlyn's mind, and I imagine that's the whole point. We struggle as the main character does to try and figure out whether Allison's murder was a random killing or something more. Along the way we are introduced to a skeptical detective, Kaitlyn's sick mother, a sleazy psychiatrist, and Allison's ex-boyfriend, all of these characters add to the mystery. None of them confirm for the audience on which end of the spectrum the story will end. Whether or not this was just a random killing and Kaitlyn is just hallucinating these memories, or there's something more to this murder, and Kaitlyn is the only one who can figure it out.
Richard Gabai directs this thriller in a way that allows the audience to piece-by-piece figure things out with the characters. By the end it's really up for interpretation what the truth is. If you see this with a friend, you will be discussing it long after the credits roll.
Ya gotta see the whole thing...
ralph_2ndedition15 February 2012
...if you're going to justify judging it later on.
I actually DID see the whole movie, but not by choice - and had I had ANY say in the matter it would have gotten turned off before the 30 minute mark.
The acting was painfully bad, thus brilliantly matching the script! Messy and so illogical it created this brain-void where only apathy and disinterest could live! Normally I wouldn't even bother reviewing a movie THIS bad, but seeing as the only other two reviewers never finished it, I kind of felt that the following needs to be said: I saw the whole thing and, YES, InSight is EXACTLY as bad as everyone says it is - EVEN the ones that never saw more than 20 minutes of it!
I actually DID see the whole movie, but not by choice - and had I had ANY say in the matter it would have gotten turned off before the 30 minute mark.
The acting was painfully bad, thus brilliantly matching the script! Messy and so illogical it created this brain-void where only apathy and disinterest could live! Normally I wouldn't even bother reviewing a movie THIS bad, but seeing as the only other two reviewers never finished it, I kind of felt that the following needs to be said: I saw the whole thing and, YES, InSight is EXACTLY as bad as everyone says it is - EVEN the ones that never saw more than 20 minutes of it!
Horrible production
rorrr13 February 2012
I rarely stop watching movies in the middle, but couldn't watch this for more than 20 minutes. It's absolutely awful.
Horrible acting. The main actress is not particularly likable. Most supporting actors are even worse.
Horrible dialog lines trying to shoehorn explanations of what's going on. Unfortunately can't judge the script, since I couldn't finish watching this.
Ridiculously bad production. Random s**t covering scenes as the camera moves. Color balance jumping from bright blue to bright yellow between the scenes. Sound quality in outdoor scenes is garbage.
Do not recommend.
Horrible acting. The main actress is not particularly likable. Most supporting actors are even worse.
Horrible dialog lines trying to shoehorn explanations of what's going on. Unfortunately can't judge the script, since I couldn't finish watching this.
Ridiculously bad production. Random s**t covering scenes as the camera moves. Color balance jumping from bright blue to bright yellow between the scenes. Sound quality in outdoor scenes is garbage.
Do not recommend.
Causes your brain to go numb
Its1917hrs15 February 2012
It's not even just bad, it's so boring it's an offence to the audience. The producer has to go back to what ever he was doing before making films. He might take the script writer with him. After 30 minutes i couldn't take it any more. The acting is the worst i have seen in ages. The story is going nowhere.
To be honest there is so little to say about this horrible production that i can't even fill 10 lines, required for this review to be posted, with anything.
A stern warning for everyone, DO NOT..I repeat....DO NOT watch this movie. It causes your brain to go numb.
To be honest there is so little to say about this horrible production that i can't even fill 10 lines, required for this review to be posted, with anything.
A stern warning for everyone, DO NOT..I repeat....DO NOT watch this movie. It causes your brain to go numb.
Richard Gabai makes something worth seeing
JohnRayPeterson8 March 2012
Warning: Spoilers
If you can get passed something like the fact this movie has no big names and not that many recognizable faces, you may experience a very good suspense thriller. With the exception of a few of the 13 reviews preceding mine, most understood this was a well done movie. I'm no fan of Gabai, but I know a well directed movie when I see one; this is one hell of a surprise. For the first half or so of the movie, the director has us thinking and believing one thing, only this series of events, and scenes, was meant to get you involved. If you stayed with the movie up to that moment, you will be surprised and will feel the need to see the rest. That's when the director has you hooked. The camera work is very good, as is the editing; the musical score is not that great and thankfully there isn't much of it.
I would spoil it for you if I give away more clues than the IMDb full storyline; it does not give away the key elements that make the movie a good thriller. Unfortunately, without giving away the key plot, you may very well think it's a boring story; it is not. I'm no fan of Adam Baldwin either; that alone almost made me skip the film. Thankfully I didn't. I liked the performances from the good looking Natalie Zea; she has the leading role. Though there are no out of the ordinary or outstanding performances from Zea or the next key character played by Sean Patrick Flanery, they are sufficiently convincing; you won't be blown away nor disappointed. As many reviewers stated, it is a movie that has you thinking; if you're not into that sort of movie, don't waste your time. I'm glad I did not dismiss the movie based on my opinion of Gabai's previous work; perhaps his editing and cinematography team had a good influence in this production, or he's been putting more thought in his work. If you are a fan of the genre (mystery/suspense/thriller), a genre that fails nowadays to gather big money for production, you must give this independent production (shot in two weeks) kudos for the result.
I would spoil it for you if I give away more clues than the IMDb full storyline; it does not give away the key elements that make the movie a good thriller. Unfortunately, without giving away the key plot, you may very well think it's a boring story; it is not. I'm no fan of Adam Baldwin either; that alone almost made me skip the film. Thankfully I didn't. I liked the performances from the good looking Natalie Zea; she has the leading role. Though there are no out of the ordinary or outstanding performances from Zea or the next key character played by Sean Patrick Flanery, they are sufficiently convincing; you won't be blown away nor disappointed. As many reviewers stated, it is a movie that has you thinking; if you're not into that sort of movie, don't waste your time. I'm glad I did not dismiss the movie based on my opinion of Gabai's previous work; perhaps his editing and cinematography team had a good influence in this production, or he's been putting more thought in his work. If you are a fan of the genre (mystery/suspense/thriller), a genre that fails nowadays to gather big money for production, you must give this independent production (shot in two weeks) kudos for the result.
Fascinating concept, awful delivery
Robert_duder16 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Insight reads fantastic. The idea sounds like it would make for a terrific thriller but the script, direction, and general delivery of the film leaves a mess that is on par with a bad TV Movie. It came as zero surprise that director Richard Gabai has dozens of never heard of before film projects, straight to videos and TV movies. It would seem that he's a garbage director who just churns out junk after junk. The writers are also full of TV shows and movies and there is just no real strong talent to direct the movie. I suppose if you're faced with watching this and nothing else and you don't have to actually pay money to see it you might something redeemable here to sit through. It isn't the worst I have seen. Natalie Zea actually does a decent job in the lead role. Its really too bad she had to force her way through this because I think she's better than what they offer. Sean Patrick Flannery's character is vapid and empty and same could be said for Christopher Lloyd who could have been given a fascinating eccentric character but is used and tossed aside. Basically steer clear of this unless you're in dire need of just anything. It just falls short in every way imaginable. 5/10
cheap, boring, annoying
thomas-40823 November 2020
So many things wrong with this movie. Cheap sets, boring story, mostly mediocre to poor acting, with an annoying lead character
The story is a typical Lifetime woman-in-jeopardy film. (Is this a Lifetime movie?) A nurse (Natalie Zea) touches a dying (dead?) woman, and thinks she has a psychic connection with the woman. Zea then believes that the woman was killed by someone she knew (a lover?), and not by a random mugger, as the police think.
Zea gives a dreadful performance. She's playing the heroine, yet she's wholly unsympathetic. Pushy, mouthy, and annoying. Writers will do that. They think that if their character is on the side of right, anything they do is justified. So Zea follows people, self-righteously pushing herself into strangers' lives, because she's a self-appointed crusader. (She later freaks out when the stranger pushes back into her life.) She breaks into the dead woman's apartment and steals evidence. She later haughtily tells the police, "Well, somebody has to investigate, since you're not doing your job." (Actually, they are.)
The lead detective is almost as annoying. He becomes Zea's love interest. He's a typical "bad movie" cop. He beats up and threatens a suspect AFTER he knows the suspect is innocent, simply because the suspect upset Zea. We're supposed to be rooting for the cop, because, hey, what a tough cop! And we're supposed to sympathize with him and Zea, because they're lovers seeking justice, whereas the suspect is (supposedly) a lowlife, even if he is technically innocent.
There is a "surprise" ending, but so what.
I watched this film because it had Juliet Landau in it, but she only has a tiny cameo.
The story is a typical Lifetime woman-in-jeopardy film. (Is this a Lifetime movie?) A nurse (Natalie Zea) touches a dying (dead?) woman, and thinks she has a psychic connection with the woman. Zea then believes that the woman was killed by someone she knew (a lover?), and not by a random mugger, as the police think.
Zea gives a dreadful performance. She's playing the heroine, yet she's wholly unsympathetic. Pushy, mouthy, and annoying. Writers will do that. They think that if their character is on the side of right, anything they do is justified. So Zea follows people, self-righteously pushing herself into strangers' lives, because she's a self-appointed crusader. (She later freaks out when the stranger pushes back into her life.) She breaks into the dead woman's apartment and steals evidence. She later haughtily tells the police, "Well, somebody has to investigate, since you're not doing your job." (Actually, they are.)
The lead detective is almost as annoying. He becomes Zea's love interest. He's a typical "bad movie" cop. He beats up and threatens a suspect AFTER he knows the suspect is innocent, simply because the suspect upset Zea. We're supposed to be rooting for the cop, because, hey, what a tough cop! And we're supposed to sympathize with him and Zea, because they're lovers seeking justice, whereas the suspect is (supposedly) a lowlife, even if he is technically innocent.
There is a "surprise" ending, but so what.
I watched this film because it had Juliet Landau in it, but she only has a tiny cameo.
This one's a thinker...
bibliofile19 February 2012
This movie kept me guessing throughout the entire movie. This wasn't intended to be the easy, mass-marketed schlock where you can figure it all out and they spell the ending out for you in the end, in case you don't have a brain or any imagination. This is one you want to go back and watch again to see if you can catch any more clues. It's a dark story with a generous helping of hope, decent to good acting and I have always had a thing for Sean Patrick Flannery, so that never hurts in my book. My only real complaint is that the camera-work and lighting sometimes got a little too artsy for my tastes. Oh, that and it's tough to see Juliet Landau as anyone not evil/insane.
boring as hell
mina-magdy4224 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
i don't write a lot of reviews actually , maybe because i am too lazy to waste some time writing on some stupid movie so i just rate it with 2 or 3 and move on . but when it comes to a good movie i became really happy to rate it with high rating because i admire the effort of acting and production . BUT THIS MOVIE made me bored to the point i didn't stand to the end of the movie because i really hated it !!! , it's just a repeated old story we watched it in a lot of movies i mean the visions which no one can see except the leading actor and all the mysterious bull sh** around the crime and all the spooky supporting actors who trying to mislead the viewer to think about who did the crime blah blah ...... well if u don't wanna be bored then simply don't watch it
InSight, the twists will keep you guessing
mimimovie28 February 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Natalie Zea (Justified, Dirty Sexy Money) plays the resolute and distressed Kaitlyn. Zea realistically conveys the characters emotions and actions. It's easy to enjoy Zea's noteworthy performance in this film. Kaitlyn not only takes on the task of solving who murdered Alison Parks, but she also provides in home care to her cancer stricken mother Patricia (Veronica Cartwright).
Kaitlyn winds up partnering up with Detective Peter Rafferty who is assigned to investigate Allison Park's murder. Detective Peter Rafferty is played by the talented Sean Patrick Flanery of Powder, Young Indiana Jones, and Boondock Saints I & II fame.
Flanery gives a solid performance as the over-worked, yet compassionate Detective Rafferty. Rafferty gets to show his tough side as well when he "questions" Allison's stalker-esque ex-boyfriend Stephen Geiger who is played by actor-musician Thomas Ian Nicholas of the T.I.N Men.
InSight's pace doesn't let up for a single moment. The films pace even speeds up as it goes into it's final stretch. As I followed each twist and turn in an attempt to piece together Kaitlyn's visions, I still was left guessing who was Allison Park's murderer. The script is craftily devised to keep people on the edge of their seats guessing until the end, and even then the ending is a surprising twist with it being "open to some interpretation". InSight's production values are highly exceptional for an independent film.
Kaitlyn winds up partnering up with Detective Peter Rafferty who is assigned to investigate Allison Park's murder. Detective Peter Rafferty is played by the talented Sean Patrick Flanery of Powder, Young Indiana Jones, and Boondock Saints I & II fame.
Flanery gives a solid performance as the over-worked, yet compassionate Detective Rafferty. Rafferty gets to show his tough side as well when he "questions" Allison's stalker-esque ex-boyfriend Stephen Geiger who is played by actor-musician Thomas Ian Nicholas of the T.I.N Men.
InSight's pace doesn't let up for a single moment. The films pace even speeds up as it goes into it's final stretch. As I followed each twist and turn in an attempt to piece together Kaitlyn's visions, I still was left guessing who was Allison Park's murderer. The script is craftily devised to keep people on the edge of their seats guessing until the end, and even then the ending is a surprising twist with it being "open to some interpretation". InSight's production values are highly exceptional for an independent film.
Entertaining but left me with questions at the end.
autumn0900731 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
The twist was suprising. Yes, she's sick. But why add the creepy neighbor at Allison's apartment complex? No one said a thing about seeing murder? Still no explanation to that at the end. So, the murder wasn't solved?? The knife was never found. Did not like the weird ending at all.
Lesson: Don't Cheat!!!!
wandernn1-81-68327427 May 2020
-1 Star for Being completely unbelievable as far as casting....No 2 Australian nurses working in the same ER are that hawt!!!!! It is completely false advertising!!!
Whoa this movie has some Star power in it. Christopher Lloyd. Adam Baldwin.....
-1 Star for the Dumbass Detective sleeping with the ....main character. Unless he's the killer! Then maybe he gets a star back!!
I'm not sure what message the movie was trying to convey, but the one I got out of it is Don't Cheat or it will end badly for JOO, as it should!!!! Hahaha
Whoa this movie has some Star power in it. Christopher Lloyd. Adam Baldwin.....
-1 Star for the Dumbass Detective sleeping with the ....main character. Unless he's the killer! Then maybe he gets a star back!!
I'm not sure what message the movie was trying to convey, but the one I got out of it is Don't Cheat or it will end badly for JOO, as it should!!!! Hahaha
The twist toward the end made zero sense
jordondave-2808530 April 2023
(2011) In/ Sight
PSYCHOLOGICAL MYSTERY THRILLER
A young lady with multiple stab wounds gets submitted into the hospital. But before she died, an ER nurse by the name of Kaitlyn (Natalie Zea) telepathically start to inherit visions from the deceased, after a defibrillator was used between them to revive her. And a portion of the movie dwells on Kaitlyn attempting to convince others about her visions, while looking after her mother at the same time who has cancer, leading to a twist that doesn't make much sense. Co-produced and directed by Richard Gabai making yet, another movie that has already been done before, but with a much lower budget.
A young lady with multiple stab wounds gets submitted into the hospital. But before she died, an ER nurse by the name of Kaitlyn (Natalie Zea) telepathically start to inherit visions from the deceased, after a defibrillator was used between them to revive her. And a portion of the movie dwells on Kaitlyn attempting to convince others about her visions, while looking after her mother at the same time who has cancer, leading to a twist that doesn't make much sense. Co-produced and directed by Richard Gabai making yet, another movie that has already been done before, but with a much lower budget.
HE LOVES ME
nogodnomasters10 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Kaitlyn (Natalie Zea) is working in the ER when they wheel in Allison (Angeline-Rose Troy) who has multiple stab wounds. For some reason they decide to zap her and Kaitlyn gets in the way. Kaitlyn believes Allison was conscience at the time and was trying to tell her who is the killer. She says, "He loves me."
Kaitlyn gets various memory flashbacks and decides to investigate on her own. She meets Shep (Christopher Lloyd), an elderly tenet who knew Allison. She also decides to see Allison's shrink.
The movie has that low budget made for TV plot, dialouge, and sound track. While you want to know who the killer is (it at least gives you more than one suspect) the film drags getting there. As I was about to fall asleep out of boredom, the film takes an unexpected turn.
Natalie Zea did a nice job. Unfortunately the film moves too slow in the beginning for a good mystery/thriller
One f-bomb (?), no nudity, dimly lit sex scene
Kaitlyn gets various memory flashbacks and decides to investigate on her own. She meets Shep (Christopher Lloyd), an elderly tenet who knew Allison. She also decides to see Allison's shrink.
The movie has that low budget made for TV plot, dialouge, and sound track. While you want to know who the killer is (it at least gives you more than one suspect) the film drags getting there. As I was about to fall asleep out of boredom, the film takes an unexpected turn.
Natalie Zea did a nice job. Unfortunately the film moves too slow in the beginning for a good mystery/thriller
One f-bomb (?), no nudity, dimly lit sex scene
None of these people got the ending!
evan9874824 February 2012
None of these people got the ending!
This movie is rated low because most people did not get the true twist!
I never wrote a review, but i had to for this movie. The ending was great and it is hard for many to put the pieces together. There are many clues this movie throws out at the audience that will tell you the true killer. Most people will have to watch the movie again when they have a better idea of who the kill may be.
The ending is not up for interpretation like one review wrote. There is one killer.
You have to really listen to everything the characters say and you can figure it out. Please rate this review so others will see it, thanks!
This movie is rated low because most people did not get the true twist!
I never wrote a review, but i had to for this movie. The ending was great and it is hard for many to put the pieces together. There are many clues this movie throws out at the audience that will tell you the true killer. Most people will have to watch the movie again when they have a better idea of who the kill may be.
The ending is not up for interpretation like one review wrote. There is one killer.
You have to really listen to everything the characters say and you can figure it out. Please rate this review so others will see it, thanks!
Exciting film for intelligent viewers
Atroy8524 February 2012
Insight is one of the most exciting films I've seen in a long time. From the first beat to the last, my heart was racing with inexplicable and unexpected excitement, a feeling shared by others I talked to afterwards. The story grabs you right away, and you hang on for the ride until you get dumped off on your butt at the end, blinking and wondering what the heck just happened. You immediately want to see it again to catch all the subtleties you know you missed the first time around! This fast-paced flick is a multi-dimensional thrill- ride layered with subtle psychological/philosophical/sociological twists and turns that intrigue the viewer all the way to the end and leaves you unsure of what dimension you've arrived at and what conclusion to draw. The direction, camera work, acting and chemistry are right on target; characters exude mystery,pathos, loyalty, betrayal, lechery all leading to the question of Who Killed Allison Parks?! See this film and you will not be disappointed!
InSight Is A Film Well Done!
MamaT17 July 2012
I finally had a chance to sit and watch In/Sight. Oh, my gosh. My first reaction once end credits rolled: I'm truly at a loss for words. Not only have I not seen such a well-written, well-directed film in a long time, I haven't ever felt such a kinship with a main character. I understand that is a driving force in films, to have a character that the viewers can relate to, but I felt a definite pull towards understanding Kaitlyn. I don't enjoy spoiling films for future viewers, so I won't go into details as to exactly why, here.
The entire movie, I feel, was very well put together, and I was so glad to have to use my mind to follow the plot line, rather than to have everything laid on a platter. I'm notorious for figuring out "whodunit" or knowing that certain things have been foreshadowed strongly, and I honestly was guessing different outcomes the entire time.
Kudos to all involved on a job very well done. That is a rarity in film land, these days.
The entire movie, I feel, was very well put together, and I was so glad to have to use my mind to follow the plot line, rather than to have everything laid on a platter. I'm notorious for figuring out "whodunit" or knowing that certain things have been foreshadowed strongly, and I honestly was guessing different outcomes the entire time.
Kudos to all involved on a job very well done. That is a rarity in film land, these days.
Discover All That Insight Has to Offer
indiravathi2719 February 2012
As I read some of the reviews of the movie InSight, I was rather confused as to why anyone would write reviews which discuss how "the story is going nowhere" and how " the plot is very simple to figure out as the defining moment is the very beginning of the movie" etc. when they admit to only watching 15 or so minutes of the film. I think had they continued to watch, they would have discovered that simplicity is not a word one would associate with this movie, and the unfolding layers of the film definitely take it somewhere. What is most refreshing about the film is that the viewer is brought to a place of ambiguity, and I have always found that which is ambiguous to be the most interesting. After 15 minutes however, one would fail to see this development.
Another refreshing aspect of the film is the beautiful, young actress Angeline-Rose Troy. Although her dialog is limited, her gestures and expressions speak to her innate talent, and I kept wanting to see more of her in the film.
Another refreshing aspect of the film is the beautiful, young actress Angeline-Rose Troy. Although her dialog is limited, her gestures and expressions speak to her innate talent, and I kept wanting to see more of her in the film.
InSight is an incredibly underrated film. It is a perfect date movie that will keep you both on the edge of your seat until the closing credits roll.
waltsimages19 February 2012
I arrived at the theater not knowing a thing about InSight. It was a new movie and I recognized a couple of the names in the cast, but hadn't seen any advertising for it, so I wasn't really sure what to expect.
The film lays out its premise fairly early on. A nurse that is caring for a dying E.R. patient is accidentally electrocuted and hears her say something that no one else in the room does before she passes out. She finds herself having visions of things she's never experienced and she thinks that they're somehow tied to the patient she tried to save. As she goes about trying to make sense of it all, she runs across the detective investigating the case. Between the two of them, they attempt to discern what really happened to the girl who died in the E.R.
It sounds like one of your typical thriller tropes: good-looking detective and good-looking victim work to solve crime and in the process, they get it on.
What makes InSight different from the typical B (or C, or D) movies that follow that formula is that it is actually good. Not only is the production value very high, but Natalie Zea (who plays the nurse) and Sean Patrick Flanery (the lead detective) actually spark off some flames during their on screen time. Their chemistry works and their scenes together are top-notch. Also turning in noteworthy performances are Angeline Rose-Troy as Allison, the victim of the crime, Adam Baldwin as Dr. Graham Barrett, and Juliet Landau as Dr. Lisa Rosan.
The strong cast helps kick the movie into high gear shortly after the basic setup is explained, and halfway through the movie you know they've done their job when you find yourself leaning forward in your seat and furrowing your brow as you try to pick apart the mystery. The writers throw some very interesting curve-balls at you, keeping the action fresh and eventually leading to a satisfying ending.
InSight is incredibly underrated and deserves more attention. It is a well-acted intelligent film that is perfect for a date night with a special someone.
The film lays out its premise fairly early on. A nurse that is caring for a dying E.R. patient is accidentally electrocuted and hears her say something that no one else in the room does before she passes out. She finds herself having visions of things she's never experienced and she thinks that they're somehow tied to the patient she tried to save. As she goes about trying to make sense of it all, she runs across the detective investigating the case. Between the two of them, they attempt to discern what really happened to the girl who died in the E.R.
It sounds like one of your typical thriller tropes: good-looking detective and good-looking victim work to solve crime and in the process, they get it on.
What makes InSight different from the typical B (or C, or D) movies that follow that formula is that it is actually good. Not only is the production value very high, but Natalie Zea (who plays the nurse) and Sean Patrick Flanery (the lead detective) actually spark off some flames during their on screen time. Their chemistry works and their scenes together are top-notch. Also turning in noteworthy performances are Angeline Rose-Troy as Allison, the victim of the crime, Adam Baldwin as Dr. Graham Barrett, and Juliet Landau as Dr. Lisa Rosan.
The strong cast helps kick the movie into high gear shortly after the basic setup is explained, and halfway through the movie you know they've done their job when you find yourself leaning forward in your seat and furrowing your brow as you try to pick apart the mystery. The writers throw some very interesting curve-balls at you, keeping the action fresh and eventually leading to a satisfying ending.
InSight is incredibly underrated and deserves more attention. It is a well-acted intelligent film that is perfect for a date night with a special someone.
Great Movie - completely blown away.
howlet-tim11 March 2012
I was blown away by this movie, It was very well thought out and has some great production values from the jump. The first few scenes are particularly intense.
I only watched the first 10 minutes, but thought if other people can review a movie after only watching 20 minutes I can go one better !
worth watching for the slow build it has, and also for the twists and turns in it. It's isn't a fast paced action flick by any measure, but for psychological thrillers, this isn't a prerequisite.
There is a lot to be said for choosing a slower progression in a movie as opposed to taking the quick return, action route that contains no substance.
def worth hanging in for up to the ten minute mark anyway.
I only watched the first 10 minutes, but thought if other people can review a movie after only watching 20 minutes I can go one better !
worth watching for the slow build it has, and also for the twists and turns in it. It's isn't a fast paced action flick by any measure, but for psychological thrillers, this isn't a prerequisite.
There is a lot to be said for choosing a slower progression in a movie as opposed to taking the quick return, action route that contains no substance.
def worth hanging in for up to the ten minute mark anyway.
Confused murder plot confusing enough to confuse anyone who tries to sort it out
clanciai18 May 2024
The only witness of the terrible case is a nurse who is with the victim after death, but who anyway seems to hear the victim say something which would indicate the murderer. Since no one else wants to have anything to do with the case, that nurse cannot let it go, but she has nothing to go on but her confused problems with second sight. Her mother has passed away, but she still seems to carry on as usual, while the daughter's problem is her constant confusion with reality and her second sight - she can't separate them, so she believes her second sight visions are all reality while reality naturally can't take her seriously - the usual problem in all films about second sight. Finally the detective decides to take her seriously, that's where the film gains momentum, but when he is faced with the fact that she is delusional about her mother as a result of the trauma of her death, the case becomes critical, and although she is certain about the murderer, that does not help. The end is tragic but logic and consistent, as the nurse is left alone with her dead ghosts.
The film gives a rather off-hand impression as if improvised, it was shot in a very short period, so no wonder it is confusing, which does not confuse its obvious intelligence, enhanced by equally intelligent and beautiful cinematography.
The film gives a rather off-hand impression as if improvised, it was shot in a very short period, so no wonder it is confusing, which does not confuse its obvious intelligence, enhanced by equally intelligent and beautiful cinematography.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
