Phonearl
Good start, but then it gets ruined
SparkMore
n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.
Ketrivie
It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.
cschwartz-7
First of all, it wasn't meant to be a traditional horror film…maybe that was my first mistake. The film itself pays homage to the horrific journey undertaken by those with a terminal illness (ie. cancer). The entire film is a metaphor; what seems like immoral and torturous experiments are simply medical necessities to ensure survival. The message behind this film is a message of hope. No matter how bad things get, keep going, even if death is knocking at your door, because you never know when it will end. I thought it would be interesting and meaningful to incorporate this kind of message within the confines of a horror film (second mistake?).You can bring as much negativity to the table as you want, and it's not going to hurt our feelings. If you like to be overcritical about movies, feel free to watch this and be overcritical about it. It's real simple – a terminally ill patient is captured and tortured by a masked man who believes that he is healing him: that's the whole story, no more is needed, and to expect the film to deliver anything but is pretentious. Taking it personal because the film doesn't speak emotion or meaning to you, meet your own personal film standards, had technical issues, acting flaws, or was filmed on a budget so low that you could find more money under a vending machine, really doesn't help us out any and is somewhat comical at best.What we like to hear from the critics is what you personally would've done different…within the confines of the film (meaning how to make the same film on the same budget, but better). Hell, we'd love to know, because our goal is to make great films on low budgets. You are 100% correct…low budget doesn't have to mean awful crap. A film is either a hit or miss; perhaps we just missed the mark here. So how do you make it better? I like to produce films that make you read between the lines (third mistake?). You have to dive into the film to pull out meaning and sense. You can't just turn your brain off and watch a visual masterpiece while the camera and actors hold your hand and walk you through it (i know that's what we're all used to now). This may not be everyone's cup of tea, especially when the mass audience will miss the point. In either case, we all had a genuinely good time making it, and hope that it does send a message to someone out there if they can manage to sit through this awful crap;).
Michel Linschoten
I can even enjoy a good B movies from time to time. Take for example weapon factory. Low budget, simple story but yet no to cheesy to enjoy it true the end of the movie.But when i putted this one on. The should not even allow this kind of crap tank movies! Bad acting, no suspense in it at all. Everything looks fake even the blood (the drilling in the head scene for xample) Its horrible...1 star and if i could that would have been a - star. I hope the director either wises up, or just plain stop directing. I know for sure he would do us ALL a big time favor on that one!
abbieh5
If you gave a monkey 5 bucks, a typewriter, and an etch-a-sketch it could make a better film than this...and probably do a better acting job too.Granted I only made it through the first 20 minutes of this movie before totally giving up, but I doubt I missed much. Low budget doesn't have to mean low quality, but it does in this case. The plot is flaky at best and all attempts to build suspense are just plain boring. Everything starts off interesting enough with the audience wondering, "Hey, why's he in a cardboard basement?," but from the opening line of "Nurse," it's obvious that every expense was spared on the cast. I'm willing to forgive a lot of things in a movie, including a set made of old refrigerator boxes, if there is something, anything else to make it interesting. But there's nothing here. I have no doubt that people worked very hard on this film, and meant well, but it's all in vain. I don't recommend you waste your time watching it, even if all you watch is the first 20 minutes.
dschmeding
"The red cell" already gives away that it works on no budget in the amateurish title sequence. Everything seems to stutter ... and that also fits the rest of the movie. Everything basically happens in one room in which main actor Ayden wakes up trapped. He doesn't know how he got there, just remembers being in a hospital before where he was diagnosed with a deadly brain tumor. Now he is in a dirty room with cardboard walls and some bloody hand prints on them... YES, CARDBOARD!! Well, luckily the implemented that in the plot and guess what, its not because it was the cheapest way of creating the cell in some basement but because its to give Ayden a false sense of hope he could escape... Yeah! The movie is slow, Ayden stumbles through his cell, some strange guy appears behind a hole in the wall and talks to him and his back story is revealed through the person behind the wall and some flashbacks in blown out lighting or desaturated with a real cheap old-film plug-in for standard editing applications.OK to put it short... a gas-masked guy appears (much reminding me of the bad guy in "Reeker") and injects Ayden with some drug. Now Ayden is either watching while he gets a needle stuck somewhere without doing anything about it, getting tortured for some strange "experiments" or walking through his cell hallucinating and seeing ghosts. The gas-masked guy tells Ayden he is some doctor and wants to help him survive... while on the other hand he tells him that he's going to die... and all that in a ridiculous "evil" voice.If you want gore... you don't get anything but a drill to the head, a guy with blood on his face and some stupid cutting of an arm with a scalpel. The basic idea is like SAW... someones trapped, tortured and trying to find out whats happening.Spoiler alert: You get a twist in the ending where Ayden dies, wakes up in a hospital and his tumor is gone... I guess they tried to go for the good ole "Its all in your head"-idea, so the whole torture thing and doctor story should represent his fight for survival I guess. Anyway that makes no sense because its never resolved why they are cutting his arm, why the ghost appearing has an eye missing and why the "doctor" is wearing a gas mask.Honesty I believe they spent as much time on the script as on continuity.. with errors like a guy being drilled through the top of his head and then waking up with bandages all around his but not the top or a gas mask zombie guy that suddenly looks pretty normal when looking through the hole in the wall I think its pretty obvious they just threw a load of crazy ideas in a pot, hoping that a that the dream story keeps the mess from falling apart. Anyway it does fall apart and there is so many bad scenes like the hospital flash backs with the doctor moving his arm like a hyperactive puppet or the idiotic flame thrower scene or production quality like muffled voices and real choppy editing that its obvious "The red cell" is on all levels a bad movie.I like small budget underground movies even with technical flaws, but they either need a fresh and consistent script or underground charm in the humor, gore or shock department. "The red cell" doesn't have any of this.
