The Living And The Dead Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
Terror by good intentions.
A descent into Hell is triggered when "Ex-Lord" Donald Brocklebank finds that he must leave Longleigh House for London to find a way to pay for the medical treatments for his wife Nancy. Alone, his over-protected, delusional, adult son, James, fancies himself in charge of the manor house with his terminally ill mother, and barricades the two of them into the house for a series of ever more panicked home treatments, mistakenly protecting her from the arrival of Nurse Mary and any outside help.
| Roger Lloyd-Pack | Donald Brocklebank |
| Leo Bill | James Brocklebank |
| Neil Conrich | Policeman |
5.80 out of 10 (444 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Best retard-abusing-his-mother movie of the year!
posted on 26 May 2009If you enjoy movies about retards running rampant and elder abuse than this is the movie for you! Some of the best scenes of a naked sick old woman being humiliated that I have ever seen in a movie. Also includes spastic idiot drug abuse and fecal covered sheets! I stopped watching when the retard started force feeding his sick mother pills to "make her better".Truly a horror to watch, and not in a good way. If this is your kind of thing, your time would be better spent watching an expose on abuse in nursing homes.This movie should not have been made.
Horrific!
posted on 26 Apr 2009This is possibly the worst film i have ever seen. I actually saw the premiere in Rotterdam Film Festival, and whilst many people walked out I stayed to the bitter end. But that was mainly because I didn't want to lose my friends. Self indulgent is a word often overused in the arts, and some of the best music and film is incredibly self indulgent, but behind that indulgence there is often genius. Unfortunately here there is nothing, not even a plot. The mistake the director Simon Rumley makes is to dwell on the suffering of the characters, all in a kind of 'gross out' adolescent way, without any insight, or any freshness. All the best films now tend not to be so mawkish, making The Living and The Dead seem like a bad student project from the 1970s. There's no lightness of touch here and no humour. Perhaps we're supposed to laugh at mentalist James in the same way we laugh at Julian Donkey Boy. But he's just not that funny and he has none of the demented hilarity of Donkey Boy. Like the rest of the cast, he's just a stereotype, an extremely annoying stereotype. All you'll learn from The Living and The Dead is that some people clearly have much more money than sense. And I'm not talking about any of the characters in the film here.
Rumley succeeds where others fear to tread.
posted on 19 Mar 2009Imagine a retelling of "The Shining" (1980) by Stanley Kubrick - but instead of Steven King's menacing snow storm and ghosts of the dead at the Overlook Hotel - this nuclear family is threatened by the bankruptcy of the landed aristocracy by health care, death by terminal cancer, and an over-protected adult son who is permanently child-like and requires vast infusions of anti-psychotics. Add to this helplessness, depression, anxiety, guilt, anger, and an oedipal-complex repressed by English manners, and you have the explosive makings for "The Living and the Dead" (2006).Kubrick's famous emotional distance from the story is replaced by Rumley's intense personal need to pull the audience into the madness which modern medicine creates with false hopes and budget efficiencies, and especially, its patent inability to assist the emotional needs of both the terminal patient and their families. Rumley succeeds where others fear to tread by plunging the audience into the thick of it.
Brave showing by a director with potential
posted on 23 Feb 2009Ignore the previous comment by 'perisho', but I would take something from the others thereafter, both positive and negative. Firstly the negatives - yes there are gaping holes in the plot, seemingly situations that wouldn't happen, possibly too long for its plot subject. Right, the positives - great acting, good use of dialogue (often repetitive and therefore affecting), good use of ambiguity (which helps convey the mental health issues that the family have) and possibly explain the seemingly apparent plot holes (is all we see really occurring?), brilliant cinematography, and it's a brave attempt at a all too often patronised subject matter. Furthermore, it is made on a tight budget in Britain. A rare commodity nowadays. Only a handful of directors in the UK work outside of the mainstream, and Rumley's effort should be applauded. Even the film factory that is the Hollywood machine can't achieve this level of skill (A Beautiful Mind, Rainman...please!). Only say Keane, Devil & Daniel Johnston and Julien Donkey Boy have we seen schizophrenia in the manner with which we see here. Yes, not everything works, but when it does, this film is powerful and touching as anything else in cinema dealing with mental illness. Well done to the director and may your second feature be as strong.
don't see this movie!
posted on 23 Dec 2008I've learned only one thing after seeing this movie, about taste you can't discuss. the DVD cover was full with compliments about this movie, but don't ask me why. I would have never published such a movie. The plot is boringly simple, there are only 3 characters, a mother who's ill, a father that has to leave the house for a while, and a son who according to the movie summary suffers from szicofrenia. everything happens in the family house. 2 things were the most terrible in this movie, the annoying way how someone who suffers szicofrenia is pictured here, mainly as a mentally retard who can't say any word of sense, and secondly the boring dialog that repeat over and over. the movie was all about the son, but he can only act as a mentally retarded guy, not as someone who suffers from szicofrenia. it's hard to believe that this movie got still so much of positive feedback...
Director's Effort To Depict The Pain And Horror Of A Parent's Death Sets This Film Into A Class By Itself.
posted on 15 Dec 2008A preference of director Simon Rumley for this film's title before its release was THE LIVING IN THE HOME OF THE DEAD since the work that he formulated is based round his potent emotional reactions to the death of his mother from cancer, an exhausting event for Rumley as well as for the disease's victim. The film will be at least in part artistically inaccessible to those viewers who will be uncomfortable watching a rather nauseous compendium of scenes filled with the actions of an obvious madman, in addition to unbridled drug usage, gore, feces, and vomitus. For the most part, Rumley employs a brilliantly expressionistic method in order to reflect his repugnance at recollecting the dismal three month decline into death of his mother, with his intent here obviously being communication to viewers of his ruinous sense of incertitude and bewilderment, quite conventional states for one observing another person gradually perish. Because there is no particular linear aspect to the narrative, the tone of the film steadily becomes surreal, with incongruous and often ostensibly senseless scenes born from a nightmarishly burdened subconscious, and while handling of this type of episode seems at times laboured and in poor taste, a viewer should be aware of the internal flaying that became a primary determinant for the piece. Shot in only eighteen days within the voluminous Cardigan Savernake House in Wiltshire, England, using eight of the derelict structure's 250 rooms, the picture is efficiently crafted by director, cast and crew, and offers a bravura turn from Leo Bill playing as addled son of a dying woman. The film was in reality constructed during post-production editing, and there will be precious little for a majority of viewers to like, since the affair plainly is too repellent for most audiences. None the less, one looks forward to whatever the talented Rumley will provide next, now that this purgative production has been completed.
Too close for comfort
posted on 16 Oct 2008I found this film particularly painful to watch for entirely personal reasons.First, I am an ex-psych nurse. I am currently a Social Care Worker dealing with some of the worst cases around. I am also mentally ill, though not critically so. As such this film touched home on just about every level.This film is black and raw and real. The acting, especially of the son, is utterly superb very much akin to cases I have dealt with, which made the rapid descent all the more believable. I sat for a majority of the film thinking of just how easily this could really happen - and likely has happened many, many times.There is an interesting quirk of time-line throughout, which highlights the reaction of the father to the actions of the son, which at its best involves a dual view of the stairwell. I felt this was something of a pivotal point and quite superb direction. The differing states of the building itself likewise reflect the state of the mother, which is again subtle but effective.Do not expect a standard horror here. It isn't. It feels more like a snapshot of real lives and as such is vastly more effective than any straight horror flick could ever hope to be.I would urge anyone with even a passing interest in mental health to watch this film. Consider it a warning of how easily the system can fail, and consider yourself forewarned.That is all.
A Completely Shattering "Realistic" Horror Film...
posted on 17 Aug 2008The greatest writers and filmmakers in the horror genre have one thing in common with their peers in other genres: they know that if you do nothing else, you have to tell a compelling story, with characters you can care about, whether you love them or hate them. If the story being told isn't worth crap, and you could hardly give a damn about the characters either way, then you're wasting your time and that of your audience. And sometimes, the best way to tell a horrifying, heartbreaking story is to keep it simple and keep it real.Though uncovering its many layers takes you in a downward spiral of disillusion, madness and death, Simon Rumley's THE LIVING AND THE DEAD pares down a horror tale to its very essence, like the best of Stephen King or Poe's deepest, darkest imaginings. But what makes this film all the more tragic and terrifying is that there's not a vampire, werewolf or banshee in sight. It's simply the story of a family experiencing an increasing series of emotional nuclear implosions that eventually destroys everything in its wake, leaving one survivor shattered, shaken and stripped of everything, especially his sanity.The entire story virtually never leaves its initial setting: Longleigh, a crumbling mansion located in an almost completely isolated part of the English countryside. The former Lord Donald Brocklebank (Roger Lloyd Pack) and his family have obviously fallen on hard times, with Donald and his wife Nancy (Kate Fahy) serving as the caretakers to severely mentally handicapped son James (Leo Bill), who is clinically a paranoid schizophrenic with severe depression, amongst other things. Under pressure to somehow resolve the family's dire financial straits, James's parents are hard-pressed to maintain the full-time job of taking care of him, and therefore have to rely on him to look after himself and his own medications – a surefire recipe for disaster. When Donald has to travel to London to settle financial affairs, he has to leave James and Nancy to fend for themselves…and that's where the story takes its most harrowing turns.You're never quite sure where you are, as Rumley, mixing the most nightmarish and disturbing aspects of King's MISERY, Polanski's REPULSION and even just a bit of the surrealism of David Lynch, (with references to the scarier sequences from Aronofsky's REQUIEM FOR A DREAM and Peter Greenaway's films), keeps the audience completely off-balance.We're left to try and decipher what version of the story we're watching: is it the hellish events that take place completely from James' psychotic point-of-view as he tries to "take care" of Nancy, whom he sees as violently ill and dying, and wants to prove his worth as the "man of the house", by making her well while his father's away? Or the 'other' version, where he has such free access to his medications that he alternates between over-and-under-medicating himself to the point of a psychotic break, which leads him to murderous acts he would've never considered otherwise? The only thing that is crystal clear by the end is that it doesn't matter which version of reality we've been witnessing really happened. The result is still a family tragedy, and it eventually leaves Donald, lost and broken, to suffer the saddest fate of all.Health care is a major issue that is universal, not just a grave concern here in the U.S., and writer/director Rumley has found a most novel way to present the concerns we all have in a manner that will hopefully disturb everyone enough to begin an extensive discourse about it. We're all worried about our future when it comes to our health, as well as our loved ones. Who will take care of our parents when they can no longer look after themselves? For that matter, who will look after us? What if there isn't anyone, or worst still, what if the only person we can rely on is probably the least capable of doing the job? But beyond the bracingly difficult subject matter are three tremendous performances. I seriously doubt that there are many American actors who would commit to their roles on the level that the cast has here. Kate Fahy gives an unbelievably brave performance as the "sickly" Nancy, with scenes that call for the kind of personal humiliation, violation and torture we can only hope we never come to experience. And Leo Bill might give the most nerve-wracking, wrenchingly accurate performance of a man falling over the edge into true madness as you're likely to see anywhere, in any horror movie or drama to date. Watching him, you can't help but wonder how and why he came to the state of affairs he's in by the time we first meet him, and what (if anything) we could do for him that would be better than his stressed-out parents can provide.And though James' deteriorating state is at the heart of the film, it's Pack's performance I identified with most, whether Rumley intended it or not. When Pack's Donald is absent, we see and feel the devastating affect it has on both his wife and son, and when he's there, we can't help but feel for him. Here is a man in his twilight years, whose dreams for a life of peaceful retirement have been forever destroyed by God-only-knows what circumstances, and now to make matters worse, finds himself in a situation where whatever he does for the good of his disintegrating family is not enough to save them from a cruel fate, so that the only peace he can find at last is in the same place where his son knew nothing but the torment of the damned.THE LIVING AND THE DEAD makes a very strong statement, and it's not for everybody. So, consider yourself forewarned, and be prepared for a thoughtful and somber evening afterward.
Rumley's The Next Hitchcock....
posted on 09 Apr 2008Joe Hitchcock, that is. One reviewer said Rumley is no Werner Herzog or David Lynch. Hell, he's not even Werner Klemperer or Richard Lynch.In all fairness to "The Living and the Dead," the actors do a fine job in portraying their parts. However, the film suffers from numerous plot holes because it feels like Rumley has absolutely no knowledge of caring for a terminally ill or disabled person. If someone needs a wheelchair to get around or assistance to go to the toilet, you don't put the toilet chair or the wheelchair far from the person that needs them. And what in the hell was the telephone doing on the first floor? In "Sorry, Wrong Number," Barbara Stanwyck had the phone next to her bed, and that was during Hollywood's Golden Age. Had I been in Donald's shoes, I would have made sure the house was more accessible, made it so that there was a phone near my wife's bed and didn't leave for London until Nurse Mary was in the house. However, that's just me.Another problem with this film is that various camera tricks and scenes lead the viewer to think that there will be a twist ending. However, the only thing we are given is seemingly endless and irritating scenes of James running through the house at speeds similar to John Wesley Shipp in "The Flash" television series. At least there was a reason for Shipp running fast. There's no reason for James doing this. Perhaps Simon Rumley confused artistic with annoying and redundant."The Living and the Dead" tries to pass itself off as a film like "Memento" or "The Usual Suspects," but it comes off as something that disappoints the viewer in the end.
ALL about good intentions...
posted on 19 Dec 2007Unwritten rule in horror #1: ALWAYS remain somewhat skeptical whenever you rent a movie of which the DVD cover is literally bespattered with praising quotes from acclaimed horror magazines and/or listings of awards won at Festivals no one ever heard of. This might be an indication that the distributors need extra reasons to convince people into renting/buying their film, because the plot summary and the still images on the back of the box aren't convincing enough. The box of "The Living and the Dead" features quotes stating "Brilliant", "Disturbing", "Harrowing" and "The Greatest Film Ever Made", but personally I don't think the film deserves any of those compliments. The tagline, on the other hand, is very truthful. It says "Terror by good intentions" and not only does this simple sentence summarize the whole plot, it also accurately describes the entire film production! The story revolves on the physical, financial and mental downfall of a once-eminent family of three living in a massive mansion in rural Britain. The father is nearly bankrupt, the mother is terminally ill and the twenty-something son James is mentally handicapped. When the father is forced to travel to London to solve his financial issues, James insists to look after his mother instead of an expensive nurse. Naturally his intentions are good, but his lack of realism and intellect make it a long period of pure agony and humiliation for his poor old mother. Ah, good intentions… Writer/director Simon Rumley obviously had plenty. The concept of the film is original and fairly engaging, but it's too little to revolve a whole movie around. "The Living and the Dead" suffers from far too many dreadfully dull moments and Rumley only seems to fill those moments up with lame visual gimmicks and pointless padding footage. He particularly seems to be fond of the fast-forward filming style. Very often we just see accelerated images of James running up and down the house for no real reason other than to kill a few extra minutes of playtime or to set up the viewers with a dreadful headache. If anything, "The Living and the Dead" is the type of film that can make even the calmest person nervous and irritated. The pointlessness of this film is really frustrating, good intentions or no good intentions. The finale is highly implausible, the film honestly isn't that shocking as it thinks it is and Rumley's atypical directing skills almost feel pretentious and arrogant. Seriously, you're not Werner Herzog or David Lynch, mister.
Interesting ,disturbing and convincing
posted on 11 Nov 2007I first heard about this film by reading a very brief description in a magazine about new DVD releases.The cover art was captivating and dark.At first I thought it was a ghost story or some other type of horror movie before I realized it was a psychological drama. I especially liked Leo Bells acting playing a very mentally challenged young man.He moves in a unique way because of the characters mental state. The super fast motion of the son off his medication gave me an adrenalin rush.It was effective but hard on the eyes.It was a nice contrast to all the other characters in their normal state moving slowly through life.It seemed very isolated and lonely in that big mansion and I could see why the father needed a break from it all and left.Also convincing was Kate Fahy playing the disabled mother.The movie had it's share of confusing moments. Just when you think it's over it starts over and you are not sure if what happened actually did or if it was a dream or delusion.One minute the wife is confined to a bed and the next she is playing caregiver to James.And at times it's hard to tell whether it's James who is ill or his father Donald as it flashes between 2 different reality's.Or it is years later and an aging Donald is remembering his past.I will have to watch it again to try and figure it out better.
Unrelenting in its dullness
posted on 04 Jun 2007That I can't believe I'm even giving it 2/10. If the goal was to make a movie that was dull, boring, tedious and depressing, it was achieved. Thank God its only 80 minutes. Anymore and I may have knifed myself..hahaha. If you have nothing better to do and need something to put you to sleep late at night, place this in the DVD player and nod off. The dream sequence is a highlight in creative stupidity. Whats that on the father's head but a crown of burning candles??...you have to be kidding me......BOO! What a waste of time...whomever wrote the "One of the best film's I've ever seen" on the cover was either paid by the director or has been living in a cave for the last 20 years.
Absolutely Unrealistic
posted on 15 Apr 2007How could anybody have not seen through this sham of writing?! 1. This man-child would have been locked up YEARS ago! 2. Who, in God's name, let's someone in that condition be responsible for their own medication? 3. The "Lord" leaves the mansion BEFORE the nurse arrives? Ridiculous!! 4. After killing his mother, he's still loose? Then, apparently not searched, he still has the knife at the funeral!!! I don't care how bad off the family were financially, in their position this neglect would never have been realistic. I literally wanted to confiscate the world's copy's and destroy them!! This was LAUGHABLY bad. Infintile in it's ridiculous depictions. Pathetic!
Good, mostly
posted on 18 Mar 2007Unlike the previous comment(er) on this film, I'd have to say that I quite enjoyed the film, also saw at the RFF, when quite a few people walked out. The thing is you see is that I am film fodder, and I find many things enjoyable that bemuse the people I know. This is a film that dwells on suffering, and, knowing first hand what it is like to suffer, and be around suffering, I can honestly say that the film engages the element of undue pain very well. Sometimes within films it is necessary to linger upon things for longer than some viewers would like, and this is one of those cases. I hope that the collaborators of this film will not be forced into procrastination by the previous comment(er), as I would very much like to see further works of the same mould, albeit without having to travel across the sea to view them. For most people you'll need to watch this film twice to really find the intensity that was so brilliant, there are gaps, but then again, TITANIC is the highest ever grossing film, who knows perfection?
A very different and compelling offering
posted on 07 Jan 2007I thought this movie was great, A lot of people commented on it falling short of the 'horror' genre, but I don't think it was ever meant to be one. Watch it as a tragic drama, and these disappointments fade. I think Leo Bill did a fantastic job and I felt drawn into his character even further by the camera's exceptional use as he moves about the house. I don't want to spoil anything, so suffice to say it was a well acted movie with great camera-work, an exceptional cast and the overlying doom which permeated throughout the movie drew me in sometimes - enough to identify with some the universal aspects of the story and at times feel a shudder through my back, more so than any 'horror' show I've seen in the last few years.
This film disturbed the s**t out of me
posted on 28 Dec 2006I saw this film at Fantasia quite recently and it completely blew me away. Me and my girlfriend were gonna take in The Lost afterwards but were so exhausted that we just went an' had a few drinks afterwards. This is an extremely unusual film - about a retarded kid who looks after his really ill mom when the dad goes away on business - and incredibly bold an gutsy I think. It starts slowly using locked off wide shots, establishing characters etc, kind of like a poor man's Merchant Ivory (the family in question are on their last legs and so there's next to no furniture etc), and then when you think you've got a hold on it Rumley says f**k you and takes it in a completely stylistic direction with crazy editing, music, camera etc. Initially this is quite jarring but it works within the context of the characterisation and the mental break-down that the retarded kid's going through that in the end I thought it's quite a brilliant device. Ultimately the film is a real emotional grind and deeply tragic but it tackles, albeit in an extreme, visceral way, what most of us at some time, I guess, will have to go through and that's having to look after ailing parents or relatives. There's no monsters in the closet or serial killers here, it's just a very stark consideration of the scariest thing around: the reality of death. This film disturbed the s**t out of me - and I wouldn't recommend it to the feint-hearted but definitely check it out if you're hard enough
Solid short film. Not as a full-length movie.
posted on 25 Oct 2006I'm just going to get this out of the way before I trash: I liked The Living and the Dead for what it was. A simple, psychological horror/drama that was brilliant and did exactly what it set out to do. So why the low score? Because as brilliant and disturbing as it was, there was nothing really special about it. It was short film turned into a full-length movie. It fit more into the "that's cute" category than the "I got my entire money's worth here" category. That was the major problem I had with it: it wasn't anything that deserved a full-length movie, necessarily. If the runtime and price were both cut in half, this would have gotten a much higher score for me.I guess I'll just start out with saying that this was one of the few movies I've ever seen that genuinely disturbed me. There was little to no blood, but the subject matter gripped me emotionally and hit home and it disturbed me. Will it disturb everyone? No. Will it disturb most? Maybe, but I doubt it. It's an acquired taste. The movie banks on you being emotionally affected, and if you're not, there really is no point in watching it because you'll be bored out of your mind. The Living and the Dead is relative in every aspect of the word, and I can't give it a definitive "this sucks" or "this was good" because it varies person to person. That isn't true about most movies, unlike what people want to believe, but that does apply here. It's your call.As for the aspects of the film that aren't relative: The acting is pretty good. The story isn't entirely original, but it isn't typical either. The camera-work is well-done for the kind of movie it is. The pacing gets a little bloated, but nowhere near as bad as it could have been. Everything was well-done in the technical stance. The story was borderline brilliant, though I can see why people would disagree.Overall, if you're looking for a psychological movie that will disturb you, this is worth a shot. I haven't seen a truly disturbing movie in years, but this was almost a little too much for me to handle. Almost. But that was based on my emotional engagement, and that is relative. Just watch it and make up your own opinion.2/10
Terrible movie
posted on 13 Sep 2006This is definitely a bad movie, especially taking into account the over-positive magazine quotes on the DVD cover: "The best movie I have ever seen.", must have been his first.The retard is a miscast of the worst possible case, he does not even come close to scary at any point in the movie. The plot is thin and the characters are not detailed.The retard should have been treated when he first struck but then the movie would have ended half an hour after it started. It does not make any sense.It would have made a nice last year school project, but should never have been released!!!
What a load of crap...
posted on 25 Jul 2006I shouldn't even get this piece of waste of time one star. I'm sitting here considering this one of the worst movies i have ever seen - and i've seen some crap in my time.The sorry piece of movie will of course give us all some bad taste in our mouth when they make awkward and embarrassing scenes like seeing a retarded son trying to help his mother when she is seriously ill and crying, scenes where the retard tries to force his mother to eat pills because "the more you take, the better you will get". But that doesn't make the movie better, touching, scary or anything else than a bad taste in my mouth and wanting to seeing this sorry movie. So lets just say that the one star i'm giving is for making me feel bad.The effects are really annoying - fast forward style effects, annoying sound. Mental-patient seeing visions effect look like a joke with a painted guy with something weird on top of his head - i guess he is supposed to look dead (and even with this they fail miserably) and he has got something that looks like a new years party decoration on top his head.Even the ever so faulty and stupid story of the family with a sick son and mother has so many annoying mistakes and just poor judgments in it that i hate this movie. I would never recommend this movie to anyone, not even my worst enemy or as looser-practical-joke recommendation to my best friends... DO NOT WASTE YOUR LIFE ON THIS!
- 1
- 2
Very good
posted on 28 May 2009How can you say "pointless" or "don't watch this movie"? This is not a thriller/gore/cheap Hollywood movie! As someone very well said "A psychological study of degeneration and dependency." Ya know... something to THINK about it and not waiting to see computer generated silliness like that RING crap. I have an idea, you who think that this movie was bad: go to apple's trailers page and look for 3d Anime and/or HORROR movies like those with tons of blood and robots and puppies that kill little children (no need to use your brain - is so nice and easy!) and i promise you, you won't be disappointed and please stay away from the actual good movies. These days people go to the movies for totally wrong motives. So sad :(