Lausanne 2024 Interview: BEEZEL Director Aaron Fradkin on Haunted Homes, Genre-Bending Horror, Crafting Viral Scares

When Aaron Fradkin’s Beezel screened at the Lausanne Underground Film Festival (LUFF), it marked a continuation of his exploration into atmospherically charged spaces that invite psychological unease.

Filmed in his own childhood home, Beezel layers generations of hauntings within its walls, drawing on genre conventions while straying from them through its episodic structure and vintage aesthetic. Fradkin reflects on his work’s synthesis of supernatural horror with found footage’s raw intimacy, sharing insights into crafting tension within the confines of familiar yet unsettling spaces.

Speaking candidly with Screen Anarchy, Fradkin sheds light on his inspirations, practical challenges, and creative processes that led to the eerie realism in Beezel. His reflections trace a path from viral shorts to feature-length suspense, underscoring the distinct lineage of horror influences that continue to shape his storytelling. In this conversation, Fradkin offers a glimpse into the intersection of past and present horror, as well as his views on genre hybridity within a medium constantly adapting to new viewer habits.

Screen Anarchy: I read about the film’s background and saw that you shot BEEZEL in your childhood home. Can you tell me how that came about?

Aaron Fradkin: Yeah, I grew up in the house we shot the movie in. I moved there in 1994 when I was six years old. I wrote the script with my wife Victoria, who also stars in the film. It was actually really easy to tap into all the creepy things I imagined as a kid growing up in that house. My bedroom was on one side of the house, and if you’ve seen the film, you’ll know it’s this long, single-story home shaped like a semi-circle.

My parents were all the way on the other side, so every night when they tucked me in, I’d always ask, "Where are you going to be?" because I was scared to be alone. I’d imagine all sorts of things happening downstairs, especially in the creepy basement. We had this old, creaky boiler system that made weird noises, and there’s an actual crawl space inside the walls. Everything you see in the movie is real. It wasn’t a set—it’s exactly how I remember it.

Do you believe the house is haunted?

Victoria does! She’s convinced it’s haunted, and a lot of other people think so too. Me? I don’t actually believe in ghosts, but that doesn’t stop me from getting creeped out—especially when I’m walking to the back of the house.

It’s a spooky place. My mom used to do laundry down in the basement, and even she was kind of freaked out by it. She didn’t even watch the movie until after they sold the house! She gets scared easily, so she waited until they no longer had to set foot in there.

Did you have to change anything for the film, like the set design?

Nope, everything you see is pretty much as it was. Even the weather was real. We were hit by a huge nor’easter during filming. That snowstorm you see on screen? All real.

In fact, this giant tree branch fell during the night and nearly crashed into the house. It missed by inches and could’ve taken out the roof or hurt someone, but we got lucky. It just added to the realism of the film.

How big was the crew?

There were about five of us. Partly for budget reasons, and partly because, honestly, no one else wanted to go into that house!

You used an episodic format in BEEZEL. Was there a specific reason for that choice?

To be honest, I’m not the biggest fan of anthologies. I prefer more cohesive narratives. But because we come from a background of making short horror films on YouTube, we thought it would be easier, budget-wise, to shoot it in pieces—four days here, take a break, then another four days, and so on.

We actually shot the middle segment first, and after screening it for people, the feedback was so positive that we decided to write what came before and after. So, it wasn’t planned as an anthology, but it turned out that way because of how we wrote and filmed it in segments. I think it gives the movie a unique feel without being a traditional anthology.

You can tell the film was made by horror fans. It mixes old-school genre elements with modern aesthetics. Did you consciously try to blend old and new horror tropes?

Yeah, I love the blending of genres. A lot of people have said there’s a bit of a giallo feel to it, like Argento-inspired. We were also influenced by movies like V/H/S. Found footage, when justified, can be really effective, like in The Blair Witch Project or Paranormal Activity. But when it’s forced, it doesn’t always work. I think films like Cloverfield didn’t necessarily need to be found footage. For us, it was about making the format fit the story.

That’s why we used different film formats—like 8mm, VHS, and mini DV—to visually represent the passage of time. Also Sinister and Evil Dead have been also influences.

Sinister is terrifying, especially the use of 8mm footage. And Evil Dead—that’s what got me into horror in the first place. I saw Evil Dead 2 first, then Army of Darkness, and finally discovered the original Evil Dead. I love how Sam Raimi managed to scare people while making them laugh. That’s the kind of movie I want to make—fun, scary, and not too deep. Just a good time.

One thing I noticed is that you avoid modern tech like smartphones in BEEZEL. Why?

Yeah, I don’t know why exactly, but I think using older technology makes things scarier. Familiarity is comforting, and smartphones are so ingrained in our lives that they feel too safe. But flip phones, old camcorders—they transport you to another time and make everything feel a bit more unsettling.

Japanese horror, like THE RING, came to mind while watching because of the tech. Was that film also an influence?

Definitely. We reference The Ring all the time. The mythology and lore in that film are so simple yet terrifying. It’s the kind of bite-sized horror I love. Each scene is its own set piece, and the high-concept logline is easy for audiences to grasp. We wanted to create something similar—simple, but effective.

There’s also this mix of supernatural horror with psychological elements, like unreliable narrators. How did you balance those two aspects?

Whenever someone asks me what scares me the most, I always say it’s losing my mind. So for me, whether or not there’s a supernatural element, I want the audience to question reality. You never know if what you’re seeing is a dream or real life. Even if a character "wakes up," who’s to say they’re not still dreaming? That uncertainty is what makes psychological horror so compelling. It’s the same with comedy—there are no rules. If it works, it works.

There are a lot of films that are disturbing on a psychological level—like Memento. Honestly, the film that scared me the most growing up was the original King Kong. I was a kid, and there was something about the black-and-white stop-motion animation that just creeped me out. It stuck with me.

You used a witch as the main antagonist in BEEZEL. Why?

Witches give you a lot of freedom to play with different horror tropes. You can dive into possession, show a creature, or go the Exorcist route. Witchcraft kind of covers everything—there are no rules. That gave us a lot of creative freedom.

And, honestly, there aren’t that many witch movies out there. It’s an underexplored genre, but witches are definitely becoming more popular.

The way you play with those tropes, bending and twisting them, is what gives the film a fresh edge. Was that something you consciously worked on during the writing process?

A lot of it came through trial and error. My wife and I have been making short films on YouTube for a while now, and it’s through that process that we figured out what works and what doesn’t. Sometimes you shoot something, and it’s just not as scary as you imagined, so you go back and try again. With Beezel, there were moments where we didn’t get it right at first.

Can you give an example?

There’s a scene where Apollo is reviewing footage, and he rewinds it to see the creature, then increases the brightness. That wasn’t in the script. Originally, he just played the footage and saw the creature, but it didn’t have the punch we wanted.

So we built that scare entirely in the edit by drawing out the suspense—showing a glimpse, making the audience unsure of what they saw, then zooming in. To me, that’s way scarier than just showing everything right away.

You mention doing films for YouTube. Are you also utilizing the viewers data?

YouTube gives you real-time feedback, so you know what’s working and what’s not. One of the biggest insights was that horror can be incredibly effective with very little dialogue. Horror is universal—what scares one person will probably scare another, no matter the culture or language.

We saw that with The Ballerina, one of our most popular shorts, which has no dialogue at all. The data showed us where people rewatched specific moments, and it wasn’t always just for the scare—it could be a small detail on screen. So we started thinking about how to build more of those moments into our work.

Did you consciously tweak BEEZEL’s script based on those insights from YouTube?

Subconsciously, yes. It’s like working out a muscle—repeating the process until it becomes second nature. Building suspense, creating scares, developing characters, and crafting an atmosphere all become instinctive after a while. You start to see what resonates with audiences and build on that.

Horror crosses cultural boundaries in a way that comedy doesn’t. Fear is universal, but humor can be very culture-specific. What’s funny in one language might fall flat in another. But scary? Scary is scary. That’s what I love about horror. When you’re in a theater, you feel this solidarity with the people around you. You’re all reacting together, experiencing the fear at the same time.

Bob Gallagher who plays Mr. Weems in the first part had this eerie Jeffrey Dahmer vibe. Was that intentional?

Absolutely. The glasses were a direct reference to Dahmer. Bob Gallagher was fantastic. We reached out to him when we were casting in Massachusetts, and when he sent in his audition tape, we were like, “This guy is perfect.” He had that creepy aura we were looking for, and he delivered the exact same performance on set.

Did he model his performance on Dahmer?

I don’t think he watched footage of Dahmer specifically, but we definitely told him that Dahmer was the inspiration for the character. We gave him the boxy glasses and leaned into that 80s serial killer vibe. It all tied into the look and feel of the film, especially with the period setting.

BEEZEL is like a trove of horror genres—serial killer tropes, supernatural elements, psychological horror. Do you think the lack of genre hierarchy today allows for more fluid storytelling?

That’s a really interesting point. I think audiences today are more open to blending genres. In the early 2000s, you had these big, studio-produced horror films like The Ring or The Conjuring that followed a more traditional structure—haunted house, main character, linear story.

But now, we’re catering to a generation that’s used to bite-sized, fast-paced entertainment, like what you find on TikTok or Instagram. It wasn’t something we consciously thought about while making Beezel, but it’s definitely influenced our style after making so many YouTube videos.

Did you take what you learned from YouTube and pack those moments into BEEZEL?

We took all the best moments we created on YouTube—those scares that really worked—and packed them into an 82-minute movie that’s just terrifying. It’s like taking all the highlights from years of experimenting and putting them into one feature.

What about the distribution strategy? Were you thinking of it primarily for the big screen, or were you also considering the small screen, given the habits of this generation?

I mean, every filmmaker wants to see their movie on the big screen. So we did have a limited theatrical release—it played in Los Angeles for a week. That was really cool because we got to meet people who came to see the movie in person. We even bought everyone candy! It was fun, but I never expected a theatrical release. I got lucky.

I do think Beezel deserves to be seen on a big screen with a big group of people because it's just so much more fun that way. But it also works on smaller screens.

I wouldn’t recommend watching the whole movie on your phone, but you could definitely watch a short scene and feel fully engaged. In fact, we released a full scene—the under-the-bed sequence—on our YouTube channel. People can watch that scene without knowing anything about the rest of the movie, and it still works as a standalone horror moment.

That’s what we’re going for: creating these set pieces that work on their own but also serve as a great segue into the full film. It’s about finding that balance between giving people what they want to see and doing what you’re passionate about. I think we’ve managed to do both with Beezel.

What are your plans for next projects?

For the next movie, I do want it to be more of a cohesive narrative. I’m proud of what we did with Beezel, but I don’t know if I want to revisit the anthological feel again—at least not in the same way. That said, if we ever expand the Beezel universe, I could see it being told in a similar format.

You’ve tapped into the habits of younger audiences. The behavioral trends you mentioned—like shorter attention spans and quick content consumption—how do you think that’s changed the perception of horror compared to older generations?

I think older generations definitely had more patience. Kids today are more ADHD, whether they know it or not. We all are, to some degree, because we always have our phones with us.

I don’t want to cater to that completely, but at the same time, especially when you’re working on a budget and don’t have the resources of someone like Christopher Nolan, you have to be efficient. You need to boil down what you’re trying to accomplish and make it as engaging as possible, as quickly as possible.

What is the future for BEEZEL?

Right now Beezel is available on Amazon Prime and Apple TV—pretty much anywhere you rent movies. Hopefully, in the next couple of months, you’ll see it on platforms like Shudder, Netflix, Hulu, or Paramount—one of those.

And what about new projects? What’s on the horizon for you?

We’re currently working on a few different ideas, possibly developing one as we speak, but it’s way too early to say anything specific. We’re also toying with the idea of expanding the Beezel universe—if we ever made a sequel, what would that look like? There’s a lot we want to do, and honestly, it feels like there’s never enough time to do it all.

You mentioned in a previous interview that the next film will be even scarier than BEEZE. Can you tell us more about that?

That’s definitely the goal. With every movie we make, we want to push the boundaries and scare audiences more than we did with the last one. I don’t remember which interview that was, but yeah—I think the next one will be more terrifying. What I want to do differently is focus on a more singular, cohesive story instead of an anthology structure.

I genuinely believe that if you’re making horror, the goal should always be to scare people. The more films we make, the better we get at delivering those scares. And honestly, I think smaller budgets often lead to scarier movies.

When you have millions of dollars, it can take away that raw, unsettling edge—it becomes too polished, too perfect. That’s why I don’t want to work with big stars, if I can avoid it. I’d rather tell a story in a contained space, with a smaller, tighter budget—it just feels more authentic to the genre.