Baskin (2015)

“The longer the film’s plot unspools, the deeper we’re dragged into a stew of literal-minded and abstract Freudian symbolism that resembles “Turkish Hellraiser,” if such a thing existed. Arda’s group is challenged by a religious cult that makes Clive Barker’s Pinhead and his sadistic, God-like Cenobites look downright benign. Arda’s comrades are told that their earthly authority means nothing, that they should prepare to be judged, and well, the rest should be seen and not read. I can tell you that the film’s loftier concepts are too neatly explained during pseudo-mystical dialogue exchanges around this point, like when the main torturer sleepily declaims, “You carry Hell with you at all times” and, “You die as you sleep, you resurrect as you wake up.” – Roger Ebert

“Baskin takes its time to get going, but it’s never boring. The first half of the film slowly lets the audience get to know its main cast of characters. Evrenol doesn’t sugar-coat the policemen. Some are kind and some are douchebags but they all feel like real people. Evrenol takes his time, slowly building the tension with haunting imagery and some truly stunning effects for such a low budget film. The man knows how to direct, which is made all the more impressive when you know that it’s his first feature film (he has filmed a few short films, which he has also brought to Fantastic Fest in the past).

It probably isn’t until the 45-minute mark that the characters reach the abandoned building, but once they do shit really hits the fan. Evrenol’s version of Hell is like Silent Hill meets Hellraiser, and it’s glorious. The climax of the film features an extended ritual sequence that is sure to send chills down anyone’s spine.” – Bloody Disgusting

“Baskin accomplishes more than most horror films insofar as it is genuinely scary. While this can mostly be attributed to a few jarring sequences featuring bloody, disfigured bodies taking part in repulsive acts, the film as a whole is still genuinely frightening. Unfortunately, a good horror film cannot rely on disturbing imagery alone, as Silent Hill (2006) has already proven. There needs to be a sense of tension and preferably a depleting sense of hope for resolution. Baskin technically does both of these things, but by the time the scarier elements of the story are introduced, we are bombarded with every hellish incarnation that the filmmakers could imagine. Suddenly, it becomes a fun house of horrors that gets a bit repetitive, to the point that things we found frightening only minutes before quickly feel overused, thus losing their intended effect.

What separates Baskin even more from other horror films, apart from a few surprisingly graphic scenes, is that it attempts to take the narrative in a more surreal, less logical direction. In theory, this would be a good thing, but the relative normalcy of the hellish imagery (particularly the principal antagonist) does not fit particularly well with the strange, inexplicable nightmare sequences. It feels as though the film was split into two halves, directed by two different people with two different visions; on the one hand, Baskin is a generic, albeit graphic horror film about hell and demons and cults, and on the other, it is a story about a young police officer, haunted by his past and afraid of losing his mind. The two plot lines are meant to compliment one another, but the difference in tone and overall quality make them uneven bedfellows.” – Philosophy in Film