I love this movie so much

Load of rubbish!!

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

After seeing the list of superlatives and awards on the DVD cover, I figured that this would be a pretty safe watch. In order to keep from spoiling my enjoyment of movies, I often try to walk into them without knowing much of anything (which seems to frustrate other people sometimes when they ask what I'm watching); so, when I started watching this movie, I figured it was probably about vampires or zombies or something. Wow, was I totally wrong! It's actually more of a tragedy about mental illness than anything else, though it's also got some surrealist and absurdist elements. That might put off some people. As a huge fan of David Lynch, I recognized that the surreal scenes were kind of homages/ripoffs of his work, but, really, it didn't bother me nearly as much as it apparently did some other Lynch fans (and, of course, surrealism will always have its detractors, calling it pretentious or stupid). In particular, one dream sequence, where a character has a strange, symbolism-laden conversation with a nightmare version of Zippy the Pinhead, reminded me VERY strongly of Lost Highway. I'm sure fellow Lynch fans know the scene that I'm talking about ("That's f***ing crazy, man."). Regardless, I liked the scene, and I thought it was done well. It's always nice to see people being influenced by Lynch, even if they're taking the influence a *bit* too far, into territory that might involve lawyers, if it were a different form of media.Moving on...The acting was stellar. I totally bought each and every character. The directing was a bit, shall we say, stylistic. I suppose it might not be everyone's cup of tea. Again, while it was slightly derivative of the style of other directors (someone is apparently a Darren Aronofsky fanboy), I liked it. The plot was told from a combination Memento and Repulsion viewpoint, mixing the out-of-order scenes of Memento with the unreliable narrator from Repulsion. In fact, the whole movie seems to take some major hints from Repulsion, while not being nearly so much of a outright homage; instead, individual scenes and the overall theme remind me of that movie.So, what are we left with? A rather strange potpourri of Lynch, Aronofsky, Polanksi, Nolan, and perhaps even a bit of Kubrick thrown in. Does it work? Yes. Is it highly derivative of other directors? Yes. Are there strange plot holes, that are never really explained (why is there only one phone in such a huge house, and why doesn't the wife have a cell phone? Why did the father leave before the arrival of the nurse? Why did... and so on)? Oh, yes, definitely. Perhaps you'll be able to forgive all these issues. Perhaps not. If you can, then I think you'll like this movie. It's powerful and intriguing.If the director can make a movie that is more original, in his own style, and work on reducing the number of bizarre plot holes that make no sense, I will become a fan. He could really have a strong future.

I think it would be fair to say The Living and the Dead had me held in some sort of blind terror for more often than not. The film is so outrageous in the places it goes and the manner in which it acts when it gets there, that it's impossible to merely put aside the watching experience having seen it. The film is a freak-show, yes, of characters; visual tricks and constructed scares, but a calculated and carefully constructed one: one that I think will tap into a nerve within, whether you're a veteran of many-a horror films or not. The film is something like a little under an hour and half long, but when it had ended, felt as if it had clocked in at something like three hours; such is the grip of terror and unease I was in. Like a hypnosis session in which you're out for the count for all of about thirty minutes, but the deep-rooted places you may have been to during that time unearthing such discomfort and a sense of feeling, that the whole process feels like half a day's gone by.The film's premise sees it set up a perilous exchange between a middle aged mother and her twenty-something son in a large, pre-modern and isolated house in the country. She's physically unwell, suffering from some sort of extreme form of M.E. whilst he's a scatty, eccentric schizophrenic whose mannerism; movements and vocal tone is wildly inconsistent and unnerving. The mother is Nancy (Fahy), the son is James (Bill) and the family name is Brocklebank; something that I think instills a certain amount of pride into the household as father and husband of the piece Donald (Lloyd-Pack) seems to furiously defend them and their right to house there by way of a number of conversations over the phone with someone. It's this someone Donald must leave the property to venture out and see, and it's from here that most of the trouble unfolds.The film's tone is unbearably downbeat, beginning in the present tense with a greyed out Donald covered in injuries as he observes an ambulance advance down his property's long, lonely driveway towards him. His face is glum, rueful and regretful and a perfect teeing up for the events the film covers in instilling a sense that something's up: he's thinking that leaving that final time was a big mistake. In flashing back to better times, certainly the best times either of these characters find themselves in throughout the film, it's revealed Donald cared for both his wife and son accordingly; with the early exchanges coming across as calm and methodical in their feeling and construction what with static camera work and long takes. This is in stark contrast to when James takes over as the self proclaimed "man of the house", a title actor Leo Bill does well in his character's mixture of pleading and exclaiming, in what is a desperate attempt to try and prove to his parents that he's able to take on responsibility. The danger signs in this lie within the fact his strict medication diet of various pills and vaccine shots sit uneasily with the fact he's commanded by his father to hide from visitors and avoid the newspaper, instilling a certain child-like sensibility to him and acting as triggers to stoke a fire of warning.Leo Bill plays James as a sort of pastiche of Rik Mayall's character from popular 1990's British TV show 'Bottom', only rendered schizophrenic and far more mentally ill. Early on, I wondered if the man had an agenda; whether or not he was at all homicidal and indeed hated his mother which added to an intense element of unease. As the film switches perspectives in carer, a gradual shift in emphasis onto James becomes apparent in the conventions writer/director Simon Rumley applies. In switching from a mainly static camera complete with long takes which took prior precedence, Rumley then throws sped-up footage; bizarre angles; editing as well as distorted sound effects which amalgamate to form odd music into the mix, getting across a sense of chaos and somebody seriously ill-suited for the task. Rumley's tactics of applying a disorientating and off the wall aesthetic to most of the scenes James' acts as carer beautifully but disturbingly conflicts in a highly effective manner with this large, decrepit, centuries old manor house with which you do not associate the given conventions.There are killings in the film; somebody gets knifed and there's a fair degree of blood running on a premise that sees it bed down in one place as terror and uncanniness plays out, but don't let that lead you to think this is a Halloween sequel or some similarly underwhelming slasher film. One sequence which goes a long way in highlighting this odd combination of techniques and conventions to actually form something half-decent occurs nearer the end when, isolated and on their own, a young female supporting character creeps through the dark passages and corridors of the home unaware of what lurks around them but knowledgeable that there's a male lead, somewhere, who could very well react negatively if he sees or finds her. The whole thing is constructed like an age-old sequence in a slasher-sub genre flick, but the film sets a bar far higher. Roger Lloyd-Pack does a superb job, banishing any lingering memory you might have of him in a prior comedic role as we observe his envisaging of what might very well have gone on during his absence. Rumley's film is not all about shocks and scares; a sequence later on in which many family members have gathered in the house's main area is shot from high on up in the rafters, the camera just too embarrassed or ashamed to go to ground level and capture these people's expressions and reactions. I found The Living and the Dead to be a smart and affecting film.

Ignore 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.

That 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.