The direction/writing was really good but the acting was even better. If I had any complaint it would have to be about the production design which seemed to be pretty basic in some spots, but it was a minor issue. But again, the acting was great and the direction were really good. Contrary to the other reviews, this is NOT a PG-13 movie, it is R scary despite the lack of blood. Remember these stories (except for one) occur in the minds of the people and therefore does not NEED a lot of blood. The scariness is in the old-fashioned suspense and in trying to figure out what is real or not and in good old-fashioned acting. I hope they make another one someday. But I doubt it. It certainly showed the acting talents of seldom used actors like Lacey Chabert and Lou Diamond Philips.

Though this film is not perfect and the overall through-line is pretty thin, the 4.5 rating I saw on IMDb before watching this is greatly underrated! The three individual stories are very subtly told with a soft sense of the intensity of human pain and how the mind deals with it. The directions is superbly intuitive and gentle with the subject matter. The Camera Shots supports the stories that need to be handles with care by keeping simple and just telling the story. If you are up for a story told in the tradition (although not as mastered) of Johnny Darko, this movies will hold your attention. It explores very deep set human pain and how that pain has manifested in the different characters of the three stories. Do not see this as a horror film - for the usual horror audience will probably be bored. The themes and the subject matter is perfect for the horror genre, but the intelligence and insight of the filmmaker is better described under an art house style presentation. Empty your mind, your preconceptions and watch the three stories with an open heart and you will walk away with a great insight into why people that hurt turn out the way they do.

Some horror films purposefully leave/cut out of scenes in order for your mind to fill in the blanks, perhaps creating more suspense. Some films are very in your face and over the top, leaving nothing to the imagination and often challenging us to continue watching. This movie falls under the first category. Incidentally, I don't think that was the intention of this movie as much as a latent function due to it having no subsistence.When I hear 'Horror Anthology' I suppose I secretly hope for something along the lines of 'Creepshow' or 'Tales From The Darkside: The Movie.' But this baddie is not even in the same ballpark.It has so much going for it in the production value, title & setting and utilizes about 5-10% of what was available. The three stories do not have any connection (not that they need to) other than Malcom Mcdowell occasionally popping up as "The Doctor" to narrate or clarify parts of the three boring stories.This movie has zero gore, and extremely sparing use of blood. I almost wonder if they were going for a PG-13 release because other than a couple female breasts, there's nothing here to justify an R rating. Don't get me wrong, I don't think that EVERY horror movie needs to have heads rolling and blood splashing everywhere; but in the case of a boring movie like this, it would have helped. I cannot recommend this to anyone who is a horror fan.

With an incredible cast including Malcolm Mcdowell and Robert England I couldn't resist buying this film when I saw it. I'm a bit of a horror geek and I was excited to see two of my favourite actors in the same film. The film is terrible, no solid/interesting storyline, the characters are laughable, and the whole thing is just a bit childish. The first story was bizarre and needless, the second story was hilarious and pathetic and the third story is currently on in the background as I write this, I'm not gripped whatsoever. The story as a whole reminds me of when I sat my GCSE English exam and I struggled to make something up and ended up with a jumble of meaningless sub-stories all mashed into one. Not good.