Back in 2006, THE LIVING AND THE DEAD took home the Jury Award for best picture at the Austin Fantastic Fest, along with best director and actor, amongst others. Now, there were some great films that played FF that year, including THE HOST, BUG, ROMAN, SEVERANCE and HATCHET. In my opinion, those are all really great genre offerings, for varying reasons. So for THE LIVING AND THE DEAD to best all of those films, it’s got to be something really special, right?

Close to bankruptcy and with a cancer-afflicted wife, Lord Donald Brocklebank (Roger Lloyd-Pack) has no choice but to sell the family estate in order to care for his loved ones. But in order for him finalize the sale, he has to travel to London and leave Nancy and his mentally handicapped son, James (Leo Bill), in the care of Nurse Mary. James, however, is determined to show his parents he’s responsible and trust-worthy, even though he isn’t in the slightest. Locking Nurse Mary out and attempting to be “the man of the house” by taking care of his mother, James spirals downward into madness and guilt, with a hint of schizophrenia, not helped any by his decision to stop taking his medication.

From a psychological standpoint, THE LIVING AND THE DEAD rings more true than any other film I’ve seen in quite a while. Leo Bill’s performance as the well meaning but severely unhinged son is neither gimmicky nor over-the-top like most of the mentally handicapped characters we’re given in films. And despite the almost non-existent back story for the characters, they completely and totally work. It felt as though I was thrust into the story in real time and while the film occasionally lingers on the mundane horrors of day to day life, especially illustrated in the mother/son relationship, it never drags. All of this is helped tremendously by the largest character in the entire film: Longleigh House. It gives off a Hammer-esque vibe, conveyed with the elegant wide shots used through out and the constantly fluctuating state of decrepitness that occupies the house’s large, sparsely filled spaces.

Almost everything in the film works. Almost. While necessary to show the progression of James’ unbalanced nature, I can’t help but think there was a better way to do it than to rip off Aronofsky’s drug sequences in REQUIEM FOR A DREAM. It’s not subtle at all and doesn’t mesh well with the rest of the film, joining the fragmented narratives that zigzag wildly throughout the feature and a hallucinatory sequence that feels a lot like an unused Monty Python sketch.

THE LIVING AND THE DEAD isn’t a horror movie in the traditional sense but its highly effective in giving viewers a thought provoking and truly disturbing experience. While it might not be everyone’s cup of tea, it comes recommended to those who enjoy deciphering a well-orchestrated decent into madness.