Bad Ben – 2016

Director: Nigel Bach

Staring: Nigel Bach

So, the run time on this movie is 86 minutes and it’s probably some of the most confusing minutes of my life. Some of the moments were genuinely creepy and elicited an air of suspense. Some of it, however, was laughable and I couldn’t believe how idiotic the character was. After the movie ended I decided to do a little research into the director, Nigel Bach, and see if I could form a more concrete opinion and I was delighted with some of the information I found. I found out that all of the dialogue was done ad-lib (which is almost painful to watch, more on that later in the review) and the movie is shot in his actual house using real surveillance cameras he installed to monitor the care of his mother as she aged. He isn’t a trained actor or director and the whole thing cost him like $300 to do. I initially had a very harsh opinion but after learning all of this I’m honestly impressed. As bad as some of the acting and effects are at times, it’s still far and away better than anything I could do.

SPOILERS AHEAD

The movie opens with Tom Riley video logging his drive to the house he has recently purchased from the city. As he talks to the camera about the house and begins to do a walkthrough I thought he genuinely seems like a normal guy. For some reason I was also very struck by the décor. I really like realism in movies so houses that are too pristine kind of pull me away from that. Little touches like the mismatched pillows on his bed and pocket change and receipts on the dresser make the set seem more genuine.

The house comes fully furnished so he does a walk through and comments on all of the furniture and decorations. The dialogue is clunky and really odd at times. There’s a random comment about needing to get the religious ornaments and bible out of the house because otherwise the house wouldn’t sell in todays PC climate. Removing the religious iconography was part of the story but using oddly placed political commentary just felt like a weird way to do it.

I’m a big fan of subtle “scares” and there’s several in this that are actually done pretty well. It’s not outright scary but seeing something move behind someone that is oblivious to the spirits around them is creepy. At 11:24, when Tom is checking out a bedroom, a figure crosses behind the doorway behind him. You only get a glimpse of it in the gap of the door way and, if you’re not paying attention, it’s easy to miss. It’s the kind of subtle imagery I really like to see.

Soon after seeing the figure through the doorway, Tom finds the furniture moved around and begins to panic. The acting is just painful. His fake panic is over the top and so far beyond believable. ( I made all of these notes before learning anything about Nigel Bach as a person and actor.) As the movie goes on his acting doesn’t seem to get any better and there’s long periods where you’re just watching a mildly annoying, kind of dense guy live his life. When he thinks someone has broken into his home, he’s suddenly more concerned with the smell rather than the fact that someone could be in with him. He finds a bag of bloody children’s clothes and knives and chooses to just not do anything with it. When he has definite conformation of supernatural activity, he’s totally unphased. He takes it in stride and starts taunting the spirits with the religious paraphernalia he threw out earlier in the movie. He really is kind of an unlikable buffoon.

It takes until 31:35 before we get footage of the being in the house. It definitely looks more like a guy in a hooded robe walking around but it’s far from the worst portrayal of a spirit I’ve seen. There is only about 3 real jumpscares in the whole movie, which I appreciate. They’re used very appropriately and at least 1 of them genuinely caught me off guard. I absolutely love they way he did 1st person shots as well. I know most of this was filmed on an iPhone but it was significantly better, in my opinion, than million dollar blockbuster movies (think Cloverfield, 2008). I can not watch movies that do “shakey cam” when attempting a 1st person narrative. It is incredibly nauseating but Bach was able to make it feel less like “I’m watching something happen” and much more like “this is happening to me”.

After finding a grave on the property marked “Ben” and a favorite toy sitting on top of it, Riley uses the toy as a way of communicating with the spirit in the house. The way it’s done is really seamless and, I thought, pretty clever. Between the toy, the sounds of a baby crying, and seeing furniture move on it’s own, my man Riley has definite proof that there’s spirits in the house. Does he leave? Call a priest? Panic? Nope. He takes it all in stride like it’s absolutely normal.

At 50:46 he finds a shitty “alter” in the attic. It’s a mix of pagan and voodoo and really doesn’t go together in any way. That sort of thing is just a pet peeve of mine. The movie redeems it’s self right after by having a genuinely creepy moment in the attic with the sounds of a baby crying in the dark. Baby sounds are so damn creepy.

Long story drag on a little bit longer, there’s lots of fighting between Riley and the spirit and Riley attempts to drive it out by chanting a random saying and holding a candle and bringing the religious paraphernalia back in the house. Side note, religious iconography do not generally work on their own. (Depending, of course, on the lore you believe in) Religious signs only have as much power as the person that’s wielding them has in belief. You also have to keep in mind the spiritual power of the being you’re trying to repel. It’s a battle of wills.

We never actually see the spirit or creature in its entirety but it does make this godawful screech when finally confronted. Apparently it was supposed to be loosely based on the Jersey Devil, although I never got that until it was mentioned in an interview with Bach. I do think, however, that not seeing it makes it significantly better. Bach knew his limits with editing and made a great choice to leave it a mystery. I won’t spoil the ending but I will say I wasn’t entirely expecting it and I’m really interested to watch the next movie in the series, apparently there like 7 of these movies.

What’s my final opinion? I’m honestly not sure. It’s kind of great in that it doesn’t take itself seriously and when you take into account what Bach managed to do with no budget and literally just what he had in his home. On the flip side, it’s certainly not a great movie by any stretch of the imagination. I’ve enlisted my father, a lifelong horror and bad movie aficionado, to watch it so we can talk about it and bounce some opinions off of each other. I do highly recommend giving it a watch, just bare in mind not to take it seriously.

Have you seen this movie before? If you’ve already watched it, what did you think? Drop your opinions in the comments and let me know!

Suspensefully yours,

Morticia