Wonderful character development!

Good concept, poorly executed.

Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Nick West is a bald (slightly ugly) guy with a boxer's mug and a potty mouth. Nick West has been accused of murdering his girlfriend in an abandoned mental institution.Nick West wants you to know the full story, and he is here to tell it… for the better part of 90 loooong minutes.We see the full version of the initial events, the two twenty-somethings very much in lurrrrve wandering around the vacant and run down facility. We see them come across the old electric chair. We see the twosome taking turns sitting in the chair while t'other performs acts of lurrrrve on them. We see the straps inexplicably clamp down on the young woman before various drills and metal protrusions create new orifices (orifii?) where there were none before – and where no orifice should rightly be. We see the aftermath of the butchered and eviscerated young woman. No longer pretty.We see Nick West in the asylum for the criminally insane, his home of the four years elapsed since the unpleasantness.Nick West has come to terms with the fact that he simply must've committed the dark deeds some four years prior. After all what else could it have been? A magic electric chair? A usually inanimate portal to another evil dimension? Or is Nick West just f*cking batsh*t crazy? It is because of this realisation that Nick West is released from the institution; on the condition that he allow a psychiatrist Dr Willard access to tell his fascinating story.After begrudgingly agreeing Nick West, Dr Willard, 2 psych students (1 hottie, 1 w*nker) and Dr Willard's hottie assistant head off to spend a night in the scene of the… whatever. On the first night the good Dr sheds light into the facilities' dark past spanning many decades.Then… stuff happens. Nasty stuff.Stuff with lots of screaming.Stuff with lots of blood.Stuff with lots of gore.Stuff with lots of profanity (including more usage of the C word than I can recall in one film).Stuff with lots of Nick West.Stuff without much of my interest.I'll give The Devil's Chair some points for trying. It had what I guess was a twist – even though realistically there was only about three possible ways that this could have turned out – at least once they chose that 'way' they went for it.The voice-over started before we even saw anything on screen. And never stopped. I grew tired of hearing from Nick West and about Nick West. Within 10 minutes I had my three possibilities and spent the next 10 minutes waiting for which one they would go with – and unlike The Sixth Sense it wasn't the fourth option of three. What remains is a nasty little piece of work with little entertainment value, few surprises and not much new or different to bring to the table. Or Chair as it were.Final Rating – 5 / 10. I have seen Nick West. I have heard his story. That was 2 nights ago though. It is now forgotten. The ultimate 'meh' horror movie.

TDC is a movie that shows refreshing honesty by admitting to its own incompetence half an hour before the end, but then berates the viewer for wanting to watch the film in the first place! The movie begins with the narrator - the "berater" - looking rather gloomy and depressed, in a dark room, apparently the victim of evil forces (and in-breeding, but that's another story), a story which he is about to convey. The snag is that he will LIE to the viewer for the next 90 minutes, until he finally 'fesses up to his own killing spree, but not before hassling the viewer for being a fan of splatter horror films. (Apparently, the writer/director Mason is a staunch proponent of NOT practicing what you preach.) West (the berater) does a bit of a Jason Statham impersonation, through the narration mainly. He even looks somewhat like a watered-down version of Statham, sort of if we took the original Statham, compressed him, starved him, and prevented him from working out for a year. The narrator is also a pause-fetishist. He keeps stopping i.e. pausing the projection in order to tell us things, not trusting our ability to watch and listen simultaneously (sort of like Mason can't chew gum and walk at the same time). So huge is the influence of the berater/liar on the director that Mason stops the movie every time the narrator wishes it. Now that's what I call intimidation.The berater's narration, which starts off decently, gets increasingly silly. One example is when he jokes about how he easily he got Rachel to take her clothes off, while they're both sitting in Hell, drenched in blood. It is at this point, at the latest, that TDC loses any viewers that were still taking any of this half-seriously (provided the viewer in question had a semblance of taste). Then, just minutes later, he goes into a soon-to-be legendary brief rant in which he actually trashes the movie, then turns against us, the viewers, almost as if blaming US for the film-makers' ineptitude. Yeah, that's right, Jason clone, blame the viewer that you guys couldn't put together a solid horror film without resorting to moronic characters and cretinous plot-twists.The plot-twist being that he had been lying to us all along. He IS the killer. There is no demon. It's all been made up. Nye-nye nye-nye nyeh nyeh. What an ingeniously written script. How difficult it must be to lie to the viewers. I guess hardly anyone can do that! Must take enormous talent to provide false information for 90 minutes. The director reminds me of a 5 year-old kid who'd been lying to his pal and then admits to it much later, shouting "ha! gotcha!". (That's where the nye-nyeh nyeh-nyeh comes in, if you hadn't guessed it.) And what a moronic ending, one that has absolutely no meaning whatsoever. We have been lied to by the narrator (i.e. the writer/director) because suddenly this switches from supernatural demon-horror to insane serial-killer on-the-loose butcher-rama. Why make an effort to write a clever screenplay with intelligent plot-twists when you can simply cheat the viewer from the first minute onwards and then bombard him with nonsense in the last minutes, hoping to turn this Z-movie crap into a talked-about cult item. Keep dreaming, Mason.Yes, Mason, a Z-movie. You referred to it as a B-movie in one your rants, but I guess you over-estimated your little horroric turd a tad. The only message I can take away from this poorly executed joke of a movie is to never trust the narration again.Oh yeah. And to never again watch a movie made by this incompetent clown.The blond actress playing Rachel is beautiful. The only positive aspect to this big fat mess.

If you listen to the lyrics of the song during the closing credits it says: "You must learn to love your demons and your demon's name is yours!"Take this trip of a movie and you may discover the meaning of those words. There is theatre in this movie that is definitely my way of thinking - and surrealism and eccentric imaginative villains, and an innocent way of telling a story that reminds me of "The Avengers" with Diana Rigg when she was at her most sexy and inspiring, and the witty and charming Patrick McNee; or perhaps, for another example of what I mean, "The Prisoner" with and made by Patrick McGoohan when he was dishy! From such British 60's theatrical antecedents come the characters in this story - charming, theatrical, existential, seeking the meaning of their existence whilst trapped in a surrealist story - is it an adventure or a dream?! "By the pricking of my thumb, something wicked this way comes!" ... what is it? What on EARTH! Venture into the rabbit hole, but only if you are prepared for the butcher's knife when the plot turns sour. That's the only thing I didn't like. But I recognized the truth that was being expressed - "when the White Knight is talking backwards" is the White Knight really you? ... is it what it seems ... or is everything the reverse of however you think it is? Is the mad person sane and the sane person a demon? ... Or has the film-maker become lost in their own labyrinth of reversal-of-reality and turned the story into their own demonic reversal of the truth in one way, and the truth in another way?! If so, then it is the film-maker who has turned, in a final twist, insane and the movie become their demon that they do not love! Why, oh why, did the film-maker not embrace the reflective - reversed - or Looking-Glass "Gandalf the Wizard's" oh so important question: "Is the mad person sane" and, conversely - as implied, by the truth being the reversal, and in the consistency of a mirror's reflection - "Is the sane person mad"?! But he copped out and semi-opted for the status-quo, nouveau-riche, family values view of "reality". He could have flipped-entirely, but unfortunately he lost his thread in the mirror-maze and couldn't get out again!

This narrative story follows Nick, a troubled man who has been accused of killing his girlfriend. With no body to be found and only Nick's stories about a supernatural chair to go on, he is put in an asylum, where he spends a good four years. That is, until a prying doctor decides to take Nick back to the location, along with a team, to perhaps find some answers to what really happened that day.Some people might watch this, expecting just any horror, but it's not what you get. In fact, this is more like the horror genres take on the absolutely brilliant "Funny Games", which plays with the audience's perception of what is real and what is not.To me, the horror genre has been infiltrated by vile money-maker horror lately, and I haven't been excited about a new horror movie in quite a while. This one, however, really got my attention.This movie isn't polished. It's messy and choppy, with some strange narrating and random jumps back and forth in time. This is also what makes this movie so brilliant.Don't expect anything out of this movie. You will definitely get your reward in the end.