Joe Hitchcock, that is. One reviewer said Rumley is no Werner Herzog or David Lynch. Hell, he's not even Werner Klemperer or Richard Lynch.<br /><br />In all fairness to "The Living and the Dead," the actors do a fine job in portraying their parts. However, the film suffers from numerous plot holes because it feels like Rumley has absolutely no knowledge of caring for a terminally ill or disabled person. If someone needs a wheelchair to get around or assistance to go to the toilet, you don't put the toilet chair or the wheelchair far from the person that needs them. And what in the hell was the telephone doing on the first floor? In "Sorry, Wrong Number," Barbara Stanwyck had the phone next to her bed, and that was during Hollywood's Golden Age. Had I been in Donald's shoes, I would have made sure the house was more accessible, made it so that there was a phone near my wife's bed and didn't leave for London until Nurse Mary was in the house. However, that's just me.<br /><br />Another problem with this film is that various camera tricks and scenes lead the viewer to think that there will be a twist ending. However, the only thing we are given is seemingly endless and irritating scenes of James running through the house at speeds similar to John Wesley Shipp in "The Flash" television series. At least there was a reason for Shipp running fast. There's no reason for James doing this. Perhaps Simon Rumley confused artistic with annoying and redundant.<br /><br />"The Living and the Dead" tries to pass itself off as a film like "Memento" or "The Usual Suspects," but it comes off as something that disappoints the viewer in the end.