I saw "Rachel's Attic," thinking that I would be in for an enjoyably visceral, ride. However, it was not to be the case. Visceral, yes, but enjoyable? That would be a big, fat, no! In fact, the only reason that I gave it a "3," is due to the fact that Gunnar Hansen appears (ever so briefly) as one of the film's reprehensible characters. How they ever lured Mr. Hansen into this piece of...work, I'll never know. The story idea is interesting but poorly executed. The direction is pedestrian and the acting is mediocre. The only thing that is worse than that, are the special effects. YIKES!!! I've seen better effects in a grade school play. Give it up, Mr. W, it's time for a career change...I hear they're hiring at Mel's Diner! There are very few, well made, Inde movies coming out of Michigan...and "Rachel's Attic" isn't one of them.
11 Reviews
Not without merit
gregerogerigegege1 June 2019
Maybe I watch too many amateur microbudget horror films, but I don't get the people who are saying that Rachel's Attic is the worst film ever. It's not even close.
Some things I liked about the film: The fetish killer looked cool. The idea of a Siri-like interface for a home security system was interesting for this movie's time. The surveillance and snuff film ideas were solid. I found the depiction of seedy sex-club and S&M weirdos to be enjoyably over the top although not an accurate representation of the subculture. The film had some gore and some plot twists.
Things that dragged the film down: Uneven performances from the actors. A running length that was too long and needlessly reprised the entire opening segment at the end. Some overly dark scenes. Some unnecessary flashbacks. At 80 minutes long, this would've been an enjoyable regional indie horror film. At about two hours long, it still has its moments but would probably test a lot of viewers' patience.
Some things I liked about the film: The fetish killer looked cool. The idea of a Siri-like interface for a home security system was interesting for this movie's time. The surveillance and snuff film ideas were solid. I found the depiction of seedy sex-club and S&M weirdos to be enjoyably over the top although not an accurate representation of the subculture. The film had some gore and some plot twists.
Things that dragged the film down: Uneven performances from the actors. A running length that was too long and needlessly reprised the entire opening segment at the end. Some overly dark scenes. Some unnecessary flashbacks. At 80 minutes long, this would've been an enjoyable regional indie horror film. At about two hours long, it still has its moments but would probably test a lot of viewers' patience.
Not that great
BhorrorQueen4 March 2005
I rented this movie on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to rent it. It starts off pretty good, with the premise being that snuff films are being aired over cable. However, the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the end of the movie really leaves you hanging. There are way too many unanswered questions. There was a great scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee.
Amazing potential (for M.S.T. 4000)
prufrock515028 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I am still owed oral gratification for being misled into viewing this film. Hornswaggled into it by having been promised a wild fetish thrill-ride at an old and reputedly haunted Hollywood theatre, I began to wonder after the first ten minutes if even dead people would waste time sitting through it. After a multitude of inward groans at the unbelievable dialogue and mawkish characters, I broke out in audible laughter upon hearing the line "now is the time for bondage and c*ck rings." Fortunately, this promoted a series of heckles from my immediate company, and together we were able to foresee the inevitable future of "Rachel's Attic," which will be shared by all whenever Mystery Science Theatre 4000 rolls around and includes it as a film to be lampooned. Until then, I encourage viewers to hold responsible those friends who have forced the film upon them and demand compensatory restitution (i.e. oral gratification).
Terrible!
jessica-a-ott23 May 2010
Terrible acting, terrible plot and shot like a very cheap soft-core porno. I just finished watching it and I have no idea what the point of the movie was. The FCC suddenly becoming hard-core investigators (instead of someone like, oh, the police?), some random child-kidnapping/molestation flashback thrown in the middle, and did I mention terrible acting? Granted, the over-arching theme of snuff films stays consistent, but that's about it. There is no flow between scenes, I'm not sure what the purpose of the Alice in Wonderland scene was, but I guess most of the scenes are that way. The fact that this movie is listed as a thriller is an out-and-out lie. The music made an attempt to elicit a spooky atmosphere, but failed miserably in the face of a terrible script. I wasn't scared, I wasn't thrilled, I wasn't even grossed out by the blood and guts. I was bored. What a waste of my life.
easily the worst film we have seen
tramp_19698 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This film is terrible. The story concerns a woman trying to find out what has happened to her sister. The film struggles with its identity, lurching from Noir/thriller to erotic, with elements of horror thrown in for good measure. The film has a very confused structure, for example with frequent use of flashbacks without tying these into the story. The plot is poorly developed, and the characterisation made it difficult to distinguish between who was who and the part they were playing. Some implausibilities exist in many films, but the scene where the main protagonist willingly accompanies a virtual stranger to his home, then agrees to go upstairs alone (to where he says she will find a phone), minus the gun she had brought with her, to call the Police, was too hard to believe. Some of the cinematography is very poor: we were watching on a 42" TV so how anyone with a smaller set could work out what was happening in the scenes taken in almost complete darkness is beyond me. Overall, a chaotic mess.
The Single Worst Movie of the Decade.....A Talentless Piece of Trash
xsellent8 August 2005
I sometimes enjoy really lousy movies....those that occasionally result when people (even talented people) get together with good intentions to produce a movie and for whatever reason it turns out to be a disaster. Movies like "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes", "Plan 9 from Outer Space", "Manos-Hands of Fate", and "Heavens Gate", etc.
So, when I heard that this movie, "Rachel's Attic", was considered by many people to be the single worst film of the decade, naturally I just HAD to see it.
Boy, do I regret that decision. This movie is beyond bad....it is SO bad that it is not even as enjoyable as the usual bad movie. The acting, filming, script, etc. are even worse than a low budget porno film: the sound is utterly horrible, the "plot" is completely incomprehensible, the "acting" is laughable....it is a complete waste of everyone's time and money. At least the porno film has porno to break up the monotony, while this ridiculous nightmare has a guy squeezing a rotten apple, and a "mad hatter's" tea party.
The lighting is non-existent...many "scenes" take place in semi or complete darkness, which is probably just as well. The "writer-director" (I use the terms loosely), David Tybor, tries to get kinky with bondage scenes...but the results would be laughable, if they weren't so pathetic. There is some nudity, but it is of such abysmal quality that it actually acts as a sexual suppressant. I could go on forever and not do justice to all the flaws and shortcomings of this truly awful waste of film.
For the love of god, avoid this train wreck. I know that despite (or perhaps because of) my negative comments, you may still be tempted to see if this piece of trash is really as bad as I claim it to be....but trust me on this....it's even worse than I have said, and you will absolutely, positively regret the experience (and expense, if you waste your money on a purchase or rental).
So, when I heard that this movie, "Rachel's Attic", was considered by many people to be the single worst film of the decade, naturally I just HAD to see it.
Boy, do I regret that decision. This movie is beyond bad....it is SO bad that it is not even as enjoyable as the usual bad movie. The acting, filming, script, etc. are even worse than a low budget porno film: the sound is utterly horrible, the "plot" is completely incomprehensible, the "acting" is laughable....it is a complete waste of everyone's time and money. At least the porno film has porno to break up the monotony, while this ridiculous nightmare has a guy squeezing a rotten apple, and a "mad hatter's" tea party.
The lighting is non-existent...many "scenes" take place in semi or complete darkness, which is probably just as well. The "writer-director" (I use the terms loosely), David Tybor, tries to get kinky with bondage scenes...but the results would be laughable, if they weren't so pathetic. There is some nudity, but it is of such abysmal quality that it actually acts as a sexual suppressant. I could go on forever and not do justice to all the flaws and shortcomings of this truly awful waste of film.
For the love of god, avoid this train wreck. I know that despite (or perhaps because of) my negative comments, you may still be tempted to see if this piece of trash is really as bad as I claim it to be....but trust me on this....it's even worse than I have said, and you will absolutely, positively regret the experience (and expense, if you waste your money on a purchase or rental).
Review From Video Graveyard
akwilks20026 January 2008
Although the premise for this movie sounded interesting enough, I was not expecting a whole hell of a lot. The basic plot of a woman going undercover in the world of stripping/porn/S&M has been done to death in b-movies especially during the heyday of the 80's. I have seen this so many times that I figured that it would be yet another retread of a sub-genre that has already seen its best product but I was pleasantly surprised as this was a more mature take on the genre that focused more on the story than extended nude scenes. Although I am not one to complain about abundant nudity, it was interesting to see this type of story told from more of a mystery angle rather than a T&A angle. We have plenty of examples of the latter from companies like New Horizons back in the day.
Rachel Nord stars as Rachel, a lawyer who learns of the death of her dominatrix sister by way of a video that was recorded when the death footage was aired on television. Rachel decides to investigate the murder on her own and befriends another dominatrix named Simone (Alicia Bewernitz) who shows her the proper way to use a whip and introduces her to the people who run a local adult establishment called "The Playground". In a great audition involving the role-playing of a substitute teacher, a naked guy in a chair, and a hammer and nail, Rachel proves herself and is invited to continue to work at the establishment. Things get a little weirder in a sequence that is a twisted take on a scene from Alice In Wonderland as Rachel does what she feels she needs to to find the truth behind her sister's death and whether or not snuff films really exist.
I always enjoy it when a filmmaker makes an effort with a bit of style to compensate for a low budget. This can elevate a run-of-the-mill thriller that we have seen a million times to something much more interesting. Through the use of 16mm film, digital video, and thought placed in angles and editing (such as split screen and some black and white footage), the filmmakers have succeeded in giving us a film that goes by quickly and deviates from the usual plot skeleton of a film of this nature. This is helped immensely from the performance of Nord who effectively portrays a woman who is able to immerse herself in some strange situations due to her drive to discover what happened to her sister. We also have a psycho involved who is killing off various sex-trade workers by tapping into their televisions and filming himself in real time as he breaks into their house and murders them all while they are able to see what is happening on the tube. This was and original and frightening concept and one that I have never seen before.
My only complaint with the movie was a number of flashbacks to the childhood of Rachel and Emily that I found to be unnecessary. These sequences did not have any relevance to the story as far as I could tell and seemed like more of an excuse to cast Gunnar Hansen (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre) rather than move the story forward. For the amount of time that Hansen is in the film, they could have fit him anywhere in the film and it would not have been so distracting trying to figure out why these sequences existed. Still, this is not a big deal and it did not detract from my enjoyment of the film. There were also some sound issues in a few scenes where the dialogue sounded different than the rest of the film. Though this was noticeable, it was not bad enough to cause too much of a concern to the viewer (especially when you are used to much crappier sound from the shot-on-video days of J.R. Bookwalter and E.I. Cinema in the early 90's).
Nord has not done anything of note since this film aside from a role as a waitress in Zombie Honeymoon. We get nude scenes from Bewernitz and Kathy Gauthier as well as a few decent yet restrained gore effects. (Josh Pasnak, 9/3/06)
Rachel Nord stars as Rachel, a lawyer who learns of the death of her dominatrix sister by way of a video that was recorded when the death footage was aired on television. Rachel decides to investigate the murder on her own and befriends another dominatrix named Simone (Alicia Bewernitz) who shows her the proper way to use a whip and introduces her to the people who run a local adult establishment called "The Playground". In a great audition involving the role-playing of a substitute teacher, a naked guy in a chair, and a hammer and nail, Rachel proves herself and is invited to continue to work at the establishment. Things get a little weirder in a sequence that is a twisted take on a scene from Alice In Wonderland as Rachel does what she feels she needs to to find the truth behind her sister's death and whether or not snuff films really exist.
I always enjoy it when a filmmaker makes an effort with a bit of style to compensate for a low budget. This can elevate a run-of-the-mill thriller that we have seen a million times to something much more interesting. Through the use of 16mm film, digital video, and thought placed in angles and editing (such as split screen and some black and white footage), the filmmakers have succeeded in giving us a film that goes by quickly and deviates from the usual plot skeleton of a film of this nature. This is helped immensely from the performance of Nord who effectively portrays a woman who is able to immerse herself in some strange situations due to her drive to discover what happened to her sister. We also have a psycho involved who is killing off various sex-trade workers by tapping into their televisions and filming himself in real time as he breaks into their house and murders them all while they are able to see what is happening on the tube. This was and original and frightening concept and one that I have never seen before.
My only complaint with the movie was a number of flashbacks to the childhood of Rachel and Emily that I found to be unnecessary. These sequences did not have any relevance to the story as far as I could tell and seemed like more of an excuse to cast Gunnar Hansen (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre) rather than move the story forward. For the amount of time that Hansen is in the film, they could have fit him anywhere in the film and it would not have been so distracting trying to figure out why these sequences existed. Still, this is not a big deal and it did not detract from my enjoyment of the film. There were also some sound issues in a few scenes where the dialogue sounded different than the rest of the film. Though this was noticeable, it was not bad enough to cause too much of a concern to the viewer (especially when you are used to much crappier sound from the shot-on-video days of J.R. Bookwalter and E.I. Cinema in the early 90's).
Nord has not done anything of note since this film aside from a role as a waitress in Zombie Honeymoon. We get nude scenes from Bewernitz and Kathy Gauthier as well as a few decent yet restrained gore effects. (Josh Pasnak, 9/3/06)
A lot of good people worked very hard for a long time!
NFXdetroit1 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Keep in mind, the budget was very, very low and it was shot for 2.5 weeks straight and then weekends after wards. The film was shot in less than a year, but close to it. So many other MI film-makers don't even finish there features or get them distributed.
It was the Directors first feature film and we did not have time for make-up tests or even a lot of money for FX period. The DP didn't have video assist and Spectrum screwed over plenty of Michigan film-makers including us, they took our films and never paid any one. When the first version was released by them, they mastered the DVD and cut out almost 3 minutes of a scene (in the police station) that gave a lot of info on Rachel.
So if you think about the logistics of it all, it came out pretty good. The killers outfit was designed & created from start to finish by the effects supervisor (MR. W)and the script and director called for the Fax to look a certain way, kind of a UN-real look and feel to them. The effects crew consisted of about 8 core guys who were fantastic.
There were so many challenges making the film and still it has a cult following. It will be screening this Spring in Westwood and Hollywood for it's world-wide release of the 2nd Directors Cut on DVD.
Keep Screamin' Rachel's Attic - Producer
It was the Directors first feature film and we did not have time for make-up tests or even a lot of money for FX period. The DP didn't have video assist and Spectrum screwed over plenty of Michigan film-makers including us, they took our films and never paid any one. When the first version was released by them, they mastered the DVD and cut out almost 3 minutes of a scene (in the police station) that gave a lot of info on Rachel.
So if you think about the logistics of it all, it came out pretty good. The killers outfit was designed & created from start to finish by the effects supervisor (MR. W)and the script and director called for the Fax to look a certain way, kind of a UN-real look and feel to them. The effects crew consisted of about 8 core guys who were fantastic.
There were so many challenges making the film and still it has a cult following. It will be screening this Spring in Westwood and Hollywood for it's world-wide release of the 2nd Directors Cut on DVD.
Keep Screamin' Rachel's Attic - Producer
One Heart Pounding Thrill Ride in Detroit
DetroitFilmMaker7 March 2003
Rachel's Attic has to be one of the best times I have ever had making a film. The cast and crew were excellent! Look for Rachel's Attic 2 in the distant future. Come make movies in Michigan! - David Michael Waszak, Producer
A Cult Classic! Very Creepy and Good FX! I like the forced grain of 16mm!!
cgeffectsdude26 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
My hats off to the film makers and fx crew. I read other comments, these people DO NOT know what they are talking about. I like doing CG effects, but the make-up fx were a perfect match for the look the director wanted. I was just in Santa Monica at AFM in Nov of 05 and my associates company (GC) just picked up this film and they want it for overseas distribution. If you watch and listen to the extra features on the special edition, you will understand how much these guys went through to make this film. The actual budget was only something like 60k and it looks amazing, It looks like 2 million at least and I have seen thousands of films with my associate/partner.
I love the look of the 16mm combined with the DV-video snuff footage, I love the forced grain. From what I was told at AFM, the director wanted a certain, almost docu-realistic feel to the film. He wanted you to be faced with what the characters in the film where faced with, which was the obscure unknown. I think it works great. I think the visuals, the camera work and make-up fx were done to create a surreal world, not knowing if the murders are real or fake unlike other films that followed Rachel's Attic, like 8mm. This film was written and shot way before 8mm and Blair Witch. I've actually seen FX in other films from the same guys who did this film, and man they were really good.
Like I said, I like CG but sometimes it is no match for some good animatronics, prosthetics or blood and guts and these guys are on top of there game. I think I saw one movie they did where a guy gets his stomach and intestines ripped out under water. My stomach just hurt watching it! I thought all the rest fx were good but I loved that scene. It was some sort of indie slasher woods film. I also read in the Hollywood Reporter over the past summer the director got the idea to make this film from a rare indie movie that was made in Texas and it had nothing to do with snuff films and then he had a bizarre nightmare that followed. That was how he came up with Rachel's Attic.
I'll admit, the acting was not as good as a 20 million Hollywood flick, but they shot it for 3 weeks and then weekends afterwards to fit the cast and crews schedule to keep everyone working. I've done some acting and having to stretch that over a couple of months, keeping the same emotion and energy is hard, plus they got screwed by there first distributor out of AZ. I guess the first version is missing 3 minutes out of the middle of film because the 1st distribution company messed up in mastering. So with all that they had to deal with and still having a newly edited film they can be proud of, the special edition will soon to be a cult classic without a doubt! Great Job Guys, this film should do amazing overseas. Heck, they were even up on stage at Fango, check out the 35 minute, well produced making of behind the scenes, you can't beat a dancing Gunnar Hansen and cracking jokes while in the make-up chair! I Love it, hate it, you have to put it in your collection. These guys are real film makers, not all the low end DV stuff that has been coming out on DVD lately.
The Rachel's Attic Special Edition is great fun! Thanks guys!
I love the look of the 16mm combined with the DV-video snuff footage, I love the forced grain. From what I was told at AFM, the director wanted a certain, almost docu-realistic feel to the film. He wanted you to be faced with what the characters in the film where faced with, which was the obscure unknown. I think it works great. I think the visuals, the camera work and make-up fx were done to create a surreal world, not knowing if the murders are real or fake unlike other films that followed Rachel's Attic, like 8mm. This film was written and shot way before 8mm and Blair Witch. I've actually seen FX in other films from the same guys who did this film, and man they were really good.
Like I said, I like CG but sometimes it is no match for some good animatronics, prosthetics or blood and guts and these guys are on top of there game. I think I saw one movie they did where a guy gets his stomach and intestines ripped out under water. My stomach just hurt watching it! I thought all the rest fx were good but I loved that scene. It was some sort of indie slasher woods film. I also read in the Hollywood Reporter over the past summer the director got the idea to make this film from a rare indie movie that was made in Texas and it had nothing to do with snuff films and then he had a bizarre nightmare that followed. That was how he came up with Rachel's Attic.
I'll admit, the acting was not as good as a 20 million Hollywood flick, but they shot it for 3 weeks and then weekends afterwards to fit the cast and crews schedule to keep everyone working. I've done some acting and having to stretch that over a couple of months, keeping the same emotion and energy is hard, plus they got screwed by there first distributor out of AZ. I guess the first version is missing 3 minutes out of the middle of film because the 1st distribution company messed up in mastering. So with all that they had to deal with and still having a newly edited film they can be proud of, the special edition will soon to be a cult classic without a doubt! Great Job Guys, this film should do amazing overseas. Heck, they were even up on stage at Fango, check out the 35 minute, well produced making of behind the scenes, you can't beat a dancing Gunnar Hansen and cracking jokes while in the make-up chair! I Love it, hate it, you have to put it in your collection. These guys are real film makers, not all the low end DV stuff that has been coming out on DVD lately.
The Rachel's Attic Special Edition is great fun! Thanks guys!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
