Horror in the Attic

The above tag line is a tip-of-the-hat nod to a previous IMDB user, and I agree. Seriously, I have never read such a deep divide in viewers over a horror movie! I have to wonder about people who call this movie "boring." What do audiences want from horror films today? There is real fear, dread and (most importantly) disorienting. I must agree that many younger minds with short attention spans will not enjoy this movie, but if you were intrigued by 12 Monkeys, Memento, Eraserhead, and other movies you HAD TO WATCH AND THINK ABOUT, I highly recommend this movie. Don't like loose ends? Tough! Want everything explained? Out of luck! But if you read Phillip K. Dick, H.P. Lovecraft or William Hope Hodgson, you will be pleased with this highly literate movie. I am looking forward to more from the director.

I am honestly not sure what to make of this film. When I came here to read the reviews, it was mainly to find out what the heck had happened, why I was left so confused and frustrated when the credits rolled. This and Mulholland Drive are two of the most confusing movies I have ever seen, and I have the distinct impression that one of two things happened with each movie: either the film was incredibly well-done, well-acted, well-shot, and well-written and just flew over my head because I'm too stupid to understand it, or it was shoddily written and pieced together like a puzzle assembled by a drugged, blindfolded, mitten-clad psycho. I'd like to think that I'm intelligent enough to pick up on clues in a movie, so the fact that both of them left me so puzzled frustrated me beyond belief.

Having read the reviews, I have a better understanding of what Attic Expeditions was about. I'd like to give it a third viewing (yes, I've already watched it twice, to no avail) and see if I can actually follow it. I enjoyed Seth Green's performance, although I can see how he might be chided for copying Brad Pitt's "12 Monkeys" character. I enjoyed the way the movie was shot, I enjoyed the twisted-ness of it. Some of it was awkward and predictable, but only at the last minute. You'd be given a tiny clue about something, then you'd guess what it was and right away you'd be rewarded with the information you just guessed.

I'm sorry if this is obtuse, but I'm trying not to give anything away here. If you're curious to know what I thought upon my third viewing after knowing more of what it was about, feel free to e-mail me. Or maybe I'll leave another review here. Or maybe I'll just take the DVD, toss in onto a burning pile of other movies I hated, and never look back.

Stay tuned.

Trevor Blackburn is put under psychiatric care after killing his girlfriend and then going into a four year coma. As part of his treatment, he is placed in Love House, a community of nuts hoping to become rehabilitated. But why can't Trevor recall the murder he's accused of?

Other people -- at least two -- have called this a "thinking man's horror film", and I'm going to join them. The events are shown out of order, usually out of context, and even once the film is completed you may or may not have understood everything that happened. At one point, there's even a nod to H. P. Lovecraft, though as near as I can tell, this film has no direct connection.

The "thinking man" aspect is either going to intrigue you or frustrate you. I am a thinking man, as is my friend Seth who watched it with me, and we were frustrated. Had it not been for our man-crushes on Jeffrey Combs and Ted Raimi, the film probably would have been turned off. Now that I've seen it through, I'm curious to watch it again knowing the answers from stage one... but only so I can understand it, not because I think I'll like it.

While Combs and Raimi made the film enjoyable, and a brief Alice Cooper was nice (anyone seen "Prince of Darkness"?), what I really disliked was the actor playing Trevor, Andras Jones. Jones simply can't act for dog snot in this picture, comes off as not knowing his own emotions and more often than not is just lost. I didn't care about him, and as a lead, that's horse apples. His supporting actor, Seth Green (playing "Douglas"), wasn't much better. Green has his moments and this wasn't one of them.

There's some minor gore, some drug use, a fair dose of sexuality... so that's good. And director Jeremy Kasten does a fine job at the helm. One scene follows Seth Green around a game room and is executed flawlessly. This is probably more due to the cinematographer, but regardless it stood out. Kasten went on to make "The Thirst" (which I enjoyed) and the remake of "Wizard of Gore" with Crispin Glover. This was his directing debut, and a job well done.

I picked this film up used for $2.99 on the power of Jeffrey Combs alone, and it was worth that for the viewing... if you can find the same deal, pick it up. Or rent it. Don't buy this one, unless you really want to irk your friends and ruin a good night of drinking. Usually I drink during horror films, and on this one I didn't. Good thing, or I never would have made it through. Thinking man, yes. Drinking man, no.

Anyone can make a disjointed tale with blood, sex and drugs, that has no plot line, has a lot of inexplicable happenings and has no tie up at the end and we are supposed to think its really deep? Is that what passes for a psychological thriller now in 2006? Spare me. I watched the whole thing and I was bored silly. It wasn't even done well enough for me to want to know what the real story was.

There must be a sane starting point at either the beginning or end. it certainly won't be in the middle...Something to hang onto. This one did neither. Waste of time and I am not a kid with a short attention span.

However, The I Inside with Ryan Phillipe and Robert Sean Leonard is excellent and did make me think. Check it out.

This movie has exactly the right balance between horror and humor and, more importantly, between revealing too much and revealing too little. Some questions are answered at the end, but some are not, and I for one like that some are not. It is not a pat, boil-in-the-bag horror movie. It is intelligent and requires that you pay attention, but it's not as if that's terribly hard to do, because it succeeds in being entertaining throughout. Those expecting pornographic vivisections will be disappointed; compared to movies like "Hellraiser," this film is more rightly classified as "psychological thriller" than horror. It remains an excellent movie, however, and if you don't get it maybe you ought to watch again. Pay a bit more attention next time.