Regression

Weinstein Company, The | Release Date: February 5, 2016

5.4	USER SCORE Mixed or average reviews based on 86 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Positive:

Mixed:

Negative:

Watch Now

Buy on

Stream On

Expand

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

CrimAug 18, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. While "based on real events" doesn't come with any expectations for anyone but the most naive and hopeful, I fell into this trap due the fact that this is more than an event; it's a phenomenon that was plenty researched and written about, with larger implications for psychology (regression therapy was fortunately a fad, but false memories are human, forever), counseling, and good practices, and there is something to be said about the vulnerability of society when panic can spread out for years and be taken seriously on a professional level, even with a lack of objective evidence. In the year of Concussion, Spotlight, The Experimenter, The Standford Experiment and so on, I expected this movie to be more of the same ilk. It is not, but it didn't have the good will to firmly, explicitly step away from it either.

As the events unfold, the accusations get wider and wilder and there are more shots of mass hysteria on the media, it seems that what the movie is going for is a modern day The Crucible. For awhile, this stands. Emma Watson is a one-note whispering waif, all tears and broken heart, Ethan Hawke is the agnostic turned raging believer, the psychologist does his regression shtick in good faith, and the suspects pile up. But this is mostly a set up, a crescendo, and when the movie has to really go somewhere with it, it embarrassingly falls apart.

To get straight to the point, then come back to the smaller things, to tell a story like this, there could have been a focus on the big picture (the real life satanic hysteria of the time, how regression therapy made it possible, how it was finally debunked) or just on the particular case. Sadly for "Regression", you need good script and characterization for the second, most of all a realistic progression, and some depth. Emma Watson's part is ok, but it is very small - she is believable in everything she does, keeping it in minor key all the way till the end. However, Ethan Hawke's detective is a series of missteps - not his acting, which follows the script and direction. Everything the detective goes through, thinks and says is guided by the heavy hand of the plot, cliched writing, and is equally broadly acted. Some things grate more than others, but more on this later. Similarly, when some supporting character needs to pop in just to say some line to indicate that They Believe Now, the movie goes precisely for the laid back skeptic; this kind of economy - one character is enough because "yes, even him" - works only a superficial level, and is transparent and in poor form.

Secondly, the movie takes a turn towards horror, with the detective "seeing" the narrated events, then having nightmares, and with one character having hallucinations. Thankfully, the potential turn into actual supernatural happenings does not occur (it would have been genuinely awful, from an ethical point of view too), so it seems like this would be a good thing, making the movie more engaging for a broader audience... Yeah, no. For one thing, Ethan Hawke seeing the scenes only makes it more apparent that a police investigation would disprove them (this isn't the 50s, there were forensics), then the nightmares are repeated as a flashback, which is stupid, and also it's not like we forgot them in the 10 minutes since we saw them.

Thirdly, the detective realizes one of the faces in his nightmare was a drawing from an ad, and from this infers an entire critique towards regression therapy, which he rants to the psychologist, who acts like he hadn't ever heard it before! The whole scene is unrealistic and pointless, and included for lip service to being about the larger issue instead of a random false accusation in a small town. It is incredibly tone deaf and could have been handled much better: someone bringing up an article with objections to regression therapy, one of the FBI reports consulting another expert, any way to introduce a professional opinion instead of making it seem like (1) it was so easy to see the faults of the procedure, regression itself, and the contribution of the police investigators and the media, and (2) despite this fact, there was no wide official controversy.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

EpicLadySpongeMay 10, 2016

Regression usually spends its time finding nothing in the pond. (No fish, no love, no service). That's the rules of being in the pond and Regression doesn't have service whatsoever.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

hscproteinApr 25, 2016

I can't believe The Weinstein would pay for such a bad movie story. Not a horror, not a thriller, not even a drop of suspense. The writer simply wants to capture that regression analysis is an unproven interviewing technique and shouldn't beI can't believe The Weinstein would pay for such a bad movie story. Not a horror, not a thriller, not even a drop of suspense. The writer simply wants to capture that regression analysis is an unproven interviewing technique and shouldn't be used. Thats all!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

WoopyaApr 3, 2016

This movie is a mess. I am actually a fan of Ethan Hawke, as well as many of the movie's cast. However, they didnt work in their respective roles largely because those roles were so poorly written. However, that isnt always the case. EmmaThis movie is a mess. I am actually a fan of Ethan Hawke, as well as many of the movie's cast. However, they didnt work in their respective roles largely because those roles were so poorly written. However, that isnt always the case. Emma Watson is smart and pretty, but she cannot act even in a pretty simple role like this 1. She lets her English accent out a couple times, and it really hurts those scenes where we are supposed to see her as a victim. We keep hearing various characters allude to the various incoming threats. "now they will kill you too" or "if I say anything they will kill me!" Then we see characters acting all afraid without explaining what we are supposed to be afraid of. Vague faces and old people looking at you are not scary, yet they scare a supposed tough guys.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

AubreyRFeb 10, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Anyone with half a brain will find it very difficult to suspend their disbelief watching this movie. Almost nobody in this film behaves in a rational way. Cops don't behave like cops, and detectives jump to premature conclusions which they explicitly base on "not a shred of evidence." Very hard to watch, especially if you are skeptically minded (in the proper sense, as in basing your beliefs on evidence). The plot is contrived and the directing is sub-par (we know these actors can do it, but performances fall flat). I almost turned it off on multiple occasions. The only time when any of the characters actually do anything with believable motivation is at the very end of the movie, when they finally realize that they are idiots and everything they thought all along was just hasty generalization with a lot of jumping to conclusions. If you are non-skeptical minded (e.g. the type who likes to believe in conspiracies or other nonsense which has no basis in fact or evidence), then this movie is probably a good one for you.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

BroyaxJan 26, 2020

Nom de nom, rien ne va dans ce film y compris pourtant l'agréable et très bon casting fort mal utilisé ici... avec par exemple la si mignonne Emma censée jouer une... mineure ? victime d'abus sexuel ? vous l'avez bien regardée Emma, on estNom de nom, rien ne va dans ce film y compris pourtant l'agréable et très bon casting fort mal utilisé ici... avec par exemple la si mignonne Emma censée jouer une... mineure ? victime d'abus sexuel ? vous l'avez bien regardée Emma, on est plus dans Harry Potter là... putain ! de toute façon, je ne sais pas comment ça se fait, elle a l'air bête...

Mais Ethan Hawke n'est pas vraiment mieux logé dans son rôle de flic constipé, tout comme le reste de ce film à tendance satanique mais sans les exorcismes... on est en effet dans de l'enquête policière à deux balles (à deux dollars) menée péniblement par un Amenabar complètement à l'ouest qui n'arrive pas à susciter ou à donner la moindre once d'intérêt à son film sans but qui tourne en rond sur lui-même... comme un con.

On arrête les dégâts bien avant la fin parce qu'on sent qu'on va "régresser" nous aussi : ce film est un métronome endormisseur !… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews