Spider from the Attic

I suffer from arachnophobia and this movie gave the the willies a bit. Mostly the HUGE cobwebs that none of the actors seem to notice. LOL The FX weren't great and I don't know if that was a spider or a scorpion or a bat???

The story could have been interesting, but the writing was dull filled with STUPID character actions and the acting was horrific and the ending was beyond lame. Maybe you fans of BAD Schlocky horror will enjoy watching and laughing at this movie. But if your a serious horror fan, then just PASS on this, cause it really has no BITE! :(

I stumbled upon the 2021 horror movie titled "Spider in the Attic" from writers Scott Jeffrey and Rhys Waterfield by sheer random chance. And I must admit that the movie's cover/poster actually seemed interesting and the movie's synopsis also sounded interesting. And being an avid horror fan and liking things with monstrously big spiders, of course I had to watch "Spider in the Attic".

Needless to say that I wasn't really harboring much of any hopes or expectations for "Spider in the Attic", given the fact that the majority of creature features out there with large spiders tend to be dubious movies at best. But still, I opted to watch this 2021 movie from director Scott Jeffrey.

First, I have to say that that the movie's cover is false advertisement, as the spiders in the movie look nothing like what is depicted here. So that was a massive disappointment. And truth be told, then the movie's cover/poster was sadly the best part about this entire movie.

The storyline told in "Spider in the Attic" was simplistic, but it was adequate in its own rights. So you are not in for a grand horror cinema experience from writers Scott Jeffrey and Rhys Waterfield. However, the characters were bland and the written dialogue was questionable.

"Spider in the Attic" has spiders, well spider-like creatures. First, as I mentioned above, they look nothing like what is shown on the cover. And the spiders in the movie were CGI animated, of course, but poorly CGI animated, I might have to add. The spider design looks extraterrestrial in appearance, which was what the storyline also hinted at, but you can't put one type of arachnid on the cover and present something else to the audience entirely.

The movie had a cast ensemble of actresses and actors all unknown to me. And that is usually something I enjoy in movies, but the performances of the ones in "Spider in the Attic" were just bland and lacking drive and energy. But of course, with the subpar script, lousy characters and dialogue, of course the actresses and actors had little to work with.

Director Scott Jeffrey delivered a disappointing movie with "Spider in the Attic", no doubt about that. And this is not a creature feature that I would recommend you waste your time, money or effort on. Especially since the movie's cover/poster was the best thing about the ordeal, and that spider is not even in the movie.

My rating of "Spider in the Attic" lands on a three out of ten stars.

The actors are doing their best with what they got, and the script throw in some real world problems to make us like the characters.

However, they have no idea on how to write characters in crisis, and that make everyone behave like.

We have a situation where we have a big deadly animal in a house we are in - what to do next ?

Well, they make all stupid choices from there on and with that all sympathy for the characters goes out the window.

Then we have the CGI. Someone saw that and thought it was ok ?

We are talking 2001 PS2 CGI here.

I however liked the ending.

I would really like a sequel with bigger budget taking off from there...

You know a movie like this is gonna fail when the FX are terrible.

Even all those hot girls could not save this awful movie sadly bad at everything acting script story etc.

As i have said before, when the writer is the Director, dont expect much and thats what we have here. There needs to be a "common sence person" position in film making. Yup, a person whos responcibility is to call out the garbage as it happens so it can be corrected, thus avoiding a cluster fk like we have here.

An aging woman needs to dial things up as her tv show is losing ratings. She decides on a road trip to interview a Doctor doing experiments on Animals. Ok, doesnt contact the guy in advance, shows up without a film crew? Serious rookie writer? Oh this is going to be a great tv show! Ok, dude is dead. Spiders all over, they decide to stay for awhile?

Ok, a fresh decent idea for a movie. Bad script leaves actors on their own. More or less unknown cast, other then Chelsea Greenwood who i have seen before & who does a great job here, as usual. The movie does have cool set location and decent camera work. The lighting isnt too good and the sound is horribile. You cant watch this late night. I had my 5.1 100 watt per channel cranked just to try and understand the whispering by folks with extreme accents. Gather 6 Cajun people from the Louisiana Bayou mix the sound so everything is twice as load as the vocals, thats about what you have here. The sound folks killed this movie. Ok, CGI on par to maybe stuff being done in the early 90s? Yeah, a good 35 years behind. Made it look like an early Full Moon movie. Its just like landscaping. If you cant afford to do it right, then make other plans. The cheesey spiders put this in the sub B movie bracket.

The ending. As thought money ran out and the credits roll. Much like many Hammer films. At home we refer to this as a "Hammer ending". You endure 90 minutes, then in the last 2 minutes everything is resolved. Just like most films of the 1930s.

Is short, the Common Sence person would have been all over this. Maybe i need to start a business? Producers Ego Deflating LLC?

Its just amazing how folks can do this and really feel that its good. Unfortunately there are many people making movies that just arent very good at it.