User Reviews (48)

Add a Review

  • Platypuschow22 December 2018
    The Institute is a thriller starring James Franco and Eric Roberts and had me bored, frustrated and simply not interested throughout.

    Based very very very very loosely on a true story it follows a girl who commits herself into an asylum after a tragedy only to find out that nefarious dealings go on within its walls.

    Franco not only stars but directs here and many don't realize he's been directing for over a decade now! I just personally don't think he's very good at it, and quite frankly I don't like seeing him in front of the camera either.

    I get what the movie is doing and the concept is passable enough, sadly the execution is lacking and meanders through its 90 minute runtime at a grindy boring pace.

    It has its moments and that finale was quite inspired but entertaining? Hardly.

    I'm sure had we known the truth about what truth happened in the real Rosewood center that would have been for a more interesting tale.

    The Good:

    Decent finale

    The Bad:

    Simply unlikable

    James Franco

    Things I Learnt From This Movie:

    I'll never understand why people adapt true stories and turn them into fiction anyway

    I don't like James Franco's face
  • nogodnomasters24 July 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    In 1893 Baltimore, Isabel Porter (Allie Gallerani) has been out of sorts since the passing of her parents. Eric Roberts convinces her and her brother that she could get the finest care at Baltimore's upscale Rosewood Institute where she could get some R&R. The doctors have brain washing practices facilitated by a drug whose content we discover at 50 minutes into the film. At this point the movie descends into an improbable Poe feature complete with a pendulum. Serious,"based on true stories" and they have a freaking pendulum from the Inquisition.

    The acting was mediocre for a horrible script that lacked depth. The characters were a bit shallow, and did women shave their hooch in the 19th century? Just asking. No reason. (Psst. Thank you Allie.) There was a Rosewood Institute. It was for feeble minded children ages 7-17 some with autism which hadn't been "discovered" as yet. The girls were adopted by the rich and used as slaves, some as sex slaves. It was not an upscale center for adults. The rites and practices that went on there, including the freaking pendulum was not exactly historical. In fact the film would have been better served in a non-historical setting. I mean a zombie-vampire apocalypse would not have made the film any less historical. James Franco-why? The film includes a lot of good actors plus Eric Roberts and Pamela Anderson.

    No swearing. 3 stars for the nudity (Allie Gallerani, Zoe Bleu, +others)
  • Lacho_716 March 2018
    A pittyful effort of look smart and surprising, comes out as a leading disorientation and regret. I genuinely believe, Franco did this movie just to be more around half naked women. It may also be a result of beting between two buddies. No story, no continuity, no acting, no screenplay, no music and no nothing. Costumes are nice though...
  • martinjackson8126 December 2018
    Wow. For the life of me, I cannot find anything about this film I liked. With a cast that should have done so much better, we have to lay blame to the awful script and terrible direction. It looked like a made for TV film from the 80s with its soft focus and glaring backlight. It's apparent thriller theme was wanting and any mention of horror or scares is mistaken. I would suspect that this could be used for GCSE media students on how not to make a film.
  • nebk6 March 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    The Institute is sadly a mess of a movie and might leave the viewer seeking professional help to deal with the trauma of watching it. OK, so its not that bad but it could and should have been much better. It deals with the story of a young girl called Isabel checking herself into the Rosewood institute to deal with the grief of loosing both of her parents. The institute at first appears like a high end spa for very wealthy women but it soon becomes apparent that there are sinister characters and forces abusing some of the women who are patients at the hospital.

    There are some quite well known names in the film like James Franco,Tim Blake Nelson, Eric Roberts, Lori Singer, Josh Duhamel and Pamela Anderson but for the most part these are cameos and the rest of the cast is relatively unknown. The dialogue is at times flat and at other times it is cringe-worthy (mentioning the healing process over and over) and the story loses momentum very quickly. The story also seems mashed up as if different movies have been mixed up. Is it a psychological thriller or a gory horror. There is pseudo philosophical discussion and there is nudity, whipping and secret orders which control everything. As if the film makers wanted to include as much as possible and yet ended up watering everything down.

    Some of the other issues are for example that the main character exhibits no real grief even though she admitted herself to the hospital for this and other "latent maladies" such as curiosity and flights of fancy. The doctor treating her says there is nothing wrong with her and then proceeds to treat her and feed her tonics and medication together with therapy and brain washing. There are a few twists as is to be expected but in the end the movie still appears nonsensical. The fact that this film is supposedly based on real events makes it even worse as the film makers didn't even respect what the real people went through. Overall a complete mess.
  • This is my first review on IMDb, I created an account solely to vent about this movie. That's your first clue... As an avid fan of all things Horror, Thriller, Dark and Creepy, I was really looking forward to this film... however I was quickly disappointed. The concept of this movie is truthfully a good one, and it could have been great. It was however, poorly executed, the script was lifeless, boring and lacked any kind of depth. I was left laughing at certain points where they quite clearly should have been 'shocking' or 'creepy' but the whole thing felt a lot like I was watching a High School drama performance. The acting was mediocre at best and even with the big star cameos, it left a lot to be desired. The film was full of continuity errors, and generally easily fixed issues which would have added something to the non-existent atmosphere the film created. For example the film is set in the 19th Century, yet in a scene where the female lead is shown topless, you can quite clearly see her bikini tan lines. I'm not just talking a little, I'm talking she's just come back from a 3 week vacation. The 'climactic' scene left me laughing. All in all, don't waste your time - unless your looking for a film to fall asleep to or have a good laugh at then it'll be perfect!!
  • mikey99920 June 2018
    The acting was inept, especially Franco. The writing was pathetic. The dialog was an affront to the ears. The plot was unbelievable from start to finish. The costumes were incoherent. The sets were dull. The photography was uninspired. The gore was sillier than the stuff you'd find at a child's Halloween party. The gratuitous nudity was... I don't know how you fail at gratuitous nudity, but this film found a way.

    Unlike Showgirls, Eyes Wide Shut, or The Phantom Menace, this movie does NOT have cult classic written anywhere on it.
  • nammage4 May 2018
    1/10
    Trash
    Warning: Spoilers
    "Based on true events" is cliché to the point of being metaphorically criminal to use. The Rosewood Institute in Maryland, during the time period this film is placed, was filled with low IQ'd children and children with other mental disabilities. It was not filled with wealthy women with mental disabilities. So, whatever truth there is in this film, it is not about this particular hospital no matter what the opening credits show with actual newspaper clippings etc.,

    I would have loved to have seen an actual film closer to what actually may have happened at such "hospitals", with the varying experimentations and the like, and some films in the past have attempted the feat but they either made it too sadistic or catered to a specific genre (such as Horror and/or Thriller) to where it just became nonsensical. Or, to the very least, perhaps even a film based on an institute where society basically throws people away and dumps them in a very poor environment; and in Maryland (and other places in the US), they did it to children. That would have been a film to watch. A film to disgust and anger people.

    I have no clue what this film is about. I've actually enjoyed some of the non-mainstream films that James Franco has put out these past few years but as I keep watching these 'experimental' films of his, I keep thinking that he just likes to hear himself talk. I am one of those who actually enjoyed his film "The Sound and the Fury". It wasn't great but it was good, in my opinion. This film: I have no idea the point of this film. Franco seems to be all about quantity these days. He reminds me of the early days of film where those in the silent era pushed out one film after another as if throwing money into a crowd. Of course, most those films were short and without substance. He's doing the same, it seems. I mean he's directed four films (in which he also stars in) this year alone. Contemporarily, he's like a B-film production company; the difference is: that's their actual living. So, what's Franco's point with these 'candy' films?

    Let's forget the poor technical faults of "The Institute" (lighting, decorum, sets etc.,) or the Quasimodo character, or the rip of the film "The Wicker Man" from 1973; and the excessive and unnecessary amount of nudity of almost every single female actress in this film (who happen to be clean shaven in 1890). Let's forget the poorly delivered lines, the writing, and the direction. Let's even forget about the accents going in and out etc., let's forget all of that. I just have one simple question: What the f--- is this film supposed to be about? Supposedly: woman enters asylum after tragedy, becomes brainwashed but remembers and seeks revenge and a way out! Which only happens in the last ten minutes of the film. See, it starts in 1893 when the actual asylum had just children in it (boys and girls, separated) but ends with it stating it happened in the 1930s. Really? Age restriction was removed in 1950. I'm not saying bad things didn't happen at Rosewood, bad unethical things did happen (and not just to the girls, but mainly the girls) but the story itself goes quite deeper than this film seems to portray it; this film is just trash.
  • If I had to guess, it is probably because James Franco fans watched it because he was in it, without knowing what to expect, and were unpleasantly surprised. It wasn't a terrible movie. It had been a while since I've watched it but the only reason I'm even on the IMDb page is because I was thinking about downloading it again to watch it with my wife (who doesn't like scary movies, but does like movies about crazy people, go figure) and she wanted to read some reviews. After reading the reviews, and then us downloading it and watching the movie anyway, I decided that I had to come back to let people know, I enjoyed it the second time, and my wife loved the movie (she wanted me to give it a 9) so I guess, make up your own mind. All I know is, the 4.0 rating doesn't do it justice!
  • Mrs_Girl24 February 2019
    2/10
    AWFUL
    Some of the worst acting I think I've ever witnessed.
  • The Victorians were renowned for institutionalizing their women for the slightest of reasons. The Victorian male's idea of equality was somewhat lopsided, to say the least. This film starts off as many in this genre, with a young woman going into an institute because of "nerves". Once there, she is subjected to a rather unorthodox treatment, the result of which culminates in far far darker and mysterious consequences.

    The acting is good. The plot clever (if a little melodramatic). The characters believable. The film is more creepy than horrific, so no gore here. What it lacks in blood and guts, it makes up for in atmosphere.

    I would recommend you NOT watch the trailer, as it does spoil the fun. The idea of the film is to lead you into the horror without you suspecting it. If you want a little something different to the usual stuff being churned out and called "Horror" these days, give this film a viewing. It is really quite enjoyable.
  • Sleepin_Dragon30 December 2018
    I am a little curious as to the incredibly low score for this film. It's a much better watch then the reviews would lead you to believe. It is a little muddled in terms of tone, it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, but in terms of its relevance I thought it rather good. During The Victorian Era it was quite commonplace for women to be placed in an Institution, for behaving in a manner that wasn't deemed 'ladylike.' The film is inspired by real life events, and it's definitely worth reading of the events that occurred at The Rosewood Center, which only closed its doors in 2009.

    The acting was rather good, Allie Gallerani and Scott Haze, were both excellent I thought. It's almost impossible to spot Pamela Anderson, but she's there. The Nurse was great, so chilling.

    Don't watch the trailers, ignore the bad reviews, and give it a chance, it's not brilliant, but it's certainly interesting. 7/10
  • Hammy acting from renowned actors you'd expect more of. It wasn't laudanum they were ingesting but copious amounts of lithium to numb the brain thus restraining the urge to burst out laughing at every cliched, hackneyed and redundant theme in the plot line.

    I hope I hammered that home.
  • Please don't waste 1hr 30mins of your life on this!!!!

    I wanted to turn this film off after 30mins but my husband is the kind of person that when you start watching something he has to see it through no matter how bad it is!!!

    The story, acting and filming of this was terrible!!!, I can't believe some of these actors actually took part in this disaster. It was slow and boring as hell, don't do it people!!!
  • gnvvclark29 November 2018
    Not sure what they hoped to gain from this movie. I'm surprised at how terrible it is considering the line-up. However, terrible it is, and I wouldn't recommend investing the time. James Franco should reconsider his decision to direct films.
  • Set in the 19th Century, a young woman checks herself into an asylum for respite as she is labels by her brother as 'too curious' and 'melancholy' she soon gets sucked into a strange way of life and eventually cult that exists there. I created an account solely to vent about this movie. That's your first clue... As an avid fan of all things Horror, Thriller, Dark and Creepy, I was really looking forward to this film... however I was quickly disappointed. The concept of this movie is truthfully a good one, and it could have been great. It was however, poorly executed, the script was lifeless, boring and lacked any kind of depth. I was left laughing at certain points where they quite clearly should have been 'shocking' or 'creepy' but the whole thing felt a lot like I was watching a High School drama performance. The acting was mediocre at best and even with the big star cameos, it left a lot to be desired. The film was full of continuity errors, and generally easily fixed issues which would have added something to the non-existent atmosphere the film created. For example the film is set in the 19th Century, yet in a scene where the female lead is shown topless, you can quite clearly see her bikini tan lines. I'm not just talking a little, I'm talking she's just come back from a 3 week vacation. The 'climactic' scene left me laughing. All in all, don't waste your time - unless your looking for a film to fall asleep to or have a good laugh at then it'll be perfect!!
  • fred-10723 August 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    This could have been a great 45 minute documentary about the Rosewood Institution and its perverse treatment of patients and its ulterior motive. Instead what we got was a badly written, badly directed film with cheap sets and an onslaught of boring drama. Don't waste your time on this stinker.
  • Is this movie for real? Couldn't bear to watch it until the end, that's how boring it is. But what really made me sit down and write this review was not its tedious pace, unoriginal storyline, unconvincing acting or hideous lighting, but the feeling that, at any minute, one of the actors (specially James Franco) might look right into the camera and say something like "are you still watching this?! You've been pranked!". Well, at least that would have been original and more in line with what I would expect from Franco, although I would feel like an idiot. But no. I don't think there must have been any reveal of the sort after I stopped watching. There is no explanation or excuse for how bad this movie is. I would feel even more like an idiot if I went on watching it any further.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The Institute is VERY loosely based on a true story. The true story of the Rosewood Center is strange enough on its own. A mental health institution whose patients were taken by the rich as slaves. The movie takes the idea of being used by the rich, but keeps it within the walls of the building itself.

    Isabel (Allie Gallerani) checks into Rosewood on her doctor's orders for grief and anxiety. When meeting Dr. Cairn (James Franco) the doctor takes her under his wing and makes her his star patient. He works on breaking her entirely to the point where she doesn't know who she is, and can become someone else as part of a performance for the rich.

    It's all illogical, but if you can just go along with it, the performances allow for the creepiness to come through. It definitely won't be for everyone, and some may hate it, but there is more to it than originally thought.
  • Looking at this new title on netflix im thinking ok this is not gonna be great but what the hell, i was bored. Saw 3 interesting names staring in the movie so i thought ok it might be good... WRONG!!! SO BAD, waste of time, bad acting, bad director. Low budget movie
  • Warning: Spoilers
    As a huge fan of Stanley Kubrick and Paul Verhoeven I was looking for a movie in a similar vein and this movie was exactly what I was looking for and it didn't disappoint in the least because this movie is not at all what it seems to be (or is exactly what it seems to be if you thought of it as a revealing satire of the sad and scandalous state of Hollywood nowadays).

    Think of it as a cross between "Eyes Wide Shut", "Showgirls" and "The Canyons". That last movie you probably never heard of because it has an even lower IMDB rating than this one. Which is inevitable I guess, because like this movie it uses intentionally wooden acting and sloppy and cliche cinematogrophy as a means to get part of the message across, which of course has a devastating effect on the critical ratings and can therefore even affect the success of the movie. And I have to admit, it also made it a bit difficult to sit through, but the underlying messages made it intriguing and rewarding enough.

    So there are (at least) 2 stories being told here. One is the surface story about the young grief stricken woman in a 19th century insane asylum who discovers some very disturbing practices going on and which (VERY) loosely follows the "actual events" and basically plays out like a typical horror movie.

    The second story which is told at the same times is also very loosely based on "actual events" but is about a fame seeking actress in modern times and the movie industry and the references to movies, plays, movie tropes, actors selling their body and soul for fame, drug abuse and other even darker aspects of Hollywood are all over the place and hard to miss.

    I think I better stop at this point, cause if I go into too much specifics or drop names, it makes ME sound like someone who is insane (or at least like a conspiracy theorist which is essentially the same).

    But rewatch it with what I hinted at in mind, and I think you won't be able to deny it, as it's actually very much "in your face".
  • The Institute: A Gothic Horror film set in 19th Century Maryland. A young woman (Allie Gallerani) enters the Rosewood Institute, suffering from stress/depression following her parent's deaths. What appears at first to be a gentle regime soon turns strange and she is subject to an increasingly bizarre psychiatric regime by Dr Cairn (James Franco). There is also a sinister surgeon who carries out experimental neurosurgery.

    Cults, Mind Control, a Marty Feldmanesque attendant, Ritual Sacrifice,The Institute brings both Get Out and A Cure For Wellness to mind. 7/10.
  • What an absolute contrived pile of crap. Starts off cliched and predictable and gets full-on ridiculous very quickly. Some truly rubbish acting, all characters are totally one-dimensional, the camerawork is average and I turned this off around an hour in when my husband walked in and asked 'What's that total crap?' and I realised when answering that I didn't have a bloody clue, despite being over an hour in.
  • This piece of rubbish is absolutely awful from start to finish. I hesitate to even call it a movie. The acting is atrocious,Franco is as bad behind the camera as he is in front of it,and once again Roberts proves he will do anything for a dollar. Seriously people do yourselves a favor and avoid this rubbish at all costs, I hope I have saved some of you from the misery of this tedious piece of crap.
  • Seriously, do not waste your time watching this trash. It only has gore & horror in it. There is no redemption at the end, there is no healing - only some twist in the plot. Do you think this woman came out betterafter everything she went through? NO! YOU WILL NEED THERAPY AFTER WATCHING THIS FILM!
An error has occured. Please try again.