Even More Horror Reviews

Starring: Frankie Avalon, George Sewell, Dennis Price. Richard O'Sullivan, Jill Haworth.    

Directed by Michael Armstrong        

88 Films (Tigon)

January 2025

A group of young adults are partying in swinging sixties London. Most are paired-up as couples, but it seems that anything goes. When they become bored with the proceedings, one of them suggests they explore an abandoned and supposedly haunted mansion just out of town. One of the girls has recently split with her much older boyfriend, but he refuses to accept the break, turning up at her flat and following her in his car. Thus, he trails her to the mansion and watches from the grounds. When one of their number is found brutally murdered, the others become hysterical and argue amongst themselves. When they search the 'haunted' house and discover no one else present, they decide that the blame would be centred on them by the police, so they decide to bury the body in another location and say nothing about their visit to the mansion. However, the realisation that one of their number must be the killer causes dissension in the ranks, so-to-speak. When they reluctantly agree to return to the mansion for a more thorough search, it will prove to be a fateful decision.

There are so many holes in the plot here that it should have been called The Colander Killer. The film is, in football terms, what is known as a game of two-halves. The script and movie itself was called The Dark for a long time. First time director Michael Armstrong had first written the script when he was eighteen. He returned to it years later and it was giver the go-ahead by Tigon Films, who made the pagan horror classics Witchfinder General (starring Vincent Price arguably in his best role) and Blood On Satan's Claw. The actors, including Frankie Avalon and Richard O'Sullivan (who would later find fame in TV serials Man About the House and Dick Turpin) enjoyed the camaraderie on set and the making of the film, but most seemed to have the opinion that when Tigon took over control of the film the content suffered for it.

Tigon inspected the unfinished content, wasn't satisfied, and set about scripting and filming entire new scenes. This is where the movie turns into two concepts and continuity goes somewhat down the pan. The original script was more of a chiller/thriller, but Tigon wished to present it as a horror and thought to achieve this by changing The Dark to The Haunted House of Horror -  which, in the context of when it was made, is an eye-catching title - even if it has only the loosest connection to the plot. George Sewell was a great actor, who would go on to be a regular in the popular serials Special Branch and Gerry Anderson's U.F.O., but he and his sub-plot strand was added to no purpose but as a red herring. There was also the changing of the initial setting to a swinging sixties London, with 'groovy' people and fashionable shops - and this is what Tigon thought would connect with the 'happening' young people of the time.

It's far from being a disaster, but it does create a clash of cultures between the party and the mansion house. The ending is a little rushed, too. It's not a dull film, but it is a little disjointed.

There is a Limited Edition Picture Booklet, plus a Reversible sleeve featuring new artwork by Sean Longmore & the original artwork poster.

Extras Include: Audio commentary by Film Critics Kim Newman and Sean Hogan; Audio commentary by Film Journalists Troy Howarth and Nathaniel Thompson; The Making Of The Haunted House of Horror; House of Horrors - Micheal Armstrong on The Haunted House of Horror; Helping to cut The Haunted House of Horror; A Party to The Haunted House of Horror; Haunted House of Horror Trailer; Horror House Trailer; Stills Gallery; Limited Edition Picture Booklet; Reversible sleeve featuring new artwork by Sean Longmore & original poster.

Verdict: 5 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026

Starring: Thomas Sainsbury, Hayden J. Weal, Kate Simmonds, Noa Campbell, Tawanda Manyimo.    

Directed by Thomas Sainsbury        

Arrow Video

February 2026

Ian sets out reluctantly on a hiking trip on the remote Loop Track trail in New Zealand. Breathing heavily with every step, he is far from certain about his physical health, his surroundings or, indeed, his state of mind. Loaded with anxiety, he simply needs to be alone. So, when he spots an Australian honeymooning couple, he hides to avoid them. Unfortunately, he is spotted by a chatty and over-zealous man who insists on sticking to him like glue - even though he attempts several times to ditch him. At the first cabin stop they meet the Australian couple. Suddenly, they are a unit: Ian's worst nightmare. Being introverted, highly-strung and paranoid (perhaps hiding something from his past), Ian becomes suspicious of his companions. The feeling of unease is exacerbated when he spots a distant shape in the trees. Things come to a head when two backpackers go missing. Is one of his companions guilty? Is there something dangerous in the vastness of the New Zealand forests? Or has Ian something to hide - even from himself?

Upon first viewing, I considered Loop Track to be mildly interesting. Okay, it's not the greatest horror/thriller that's ever graced our screens, but I subsequently re-evaluated the content. Of course, by far the most interesting character is Ian, more than ably played by director Thomas Sainsbury. He partly based Ian on himself (as he saw his past self as nervous and disliking conflict of any kind), but this characterisation is exaggerated. It's more open to interpretation; it's the only factor which makes this film interesting - aside, perhaps, from the ending. The plot has been described as an allegory for knowing when to ask for help. There's definitely something in that; however, much more is suggested of Ian's background than is played-out. We learn that he was married and separated, but there is no development on this. Did it end because of something his wife did, making him the way he is? Or did it end because of his mannerisms or something he did? I know that in real life we don't get to know the complete story of a person but, in the confines of a movie, why mention an incident unless you're going to expand upon it?

So, in conclusion, although I enjoyed the film for being a psychological exploration of a character's perspective (a journey of discovery), I believe that aspect could have been expanded significantly more, so that we don't really know whether he will be the villain or the reluctant hero. Therefore, I was left disappointed because of what it could have been.

This is a nice little package, incorperating: Reversible sleeve featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by Dare Creative; Double-sided foldout poster featuring original and newly commissioned artwork by Dare Creative; Illustrated collector’s booklet featuring new writing on the film by film critic and author Alexandra Heller-Nicholas, director’s notes and project background.

The extras are entertaining and insightful. As each are only two or three minutes long, it might have been a good idea to incorporate them all into one documentary.

Extras Include: New audio commentary with director, writer and lead actor Tom Sainsbury alongside producer and editor Gabriel Lunte; The Story, director and writer Tom Sainsbury introduces the story behind Loop Track; Tom’s Vision, director and writer Tom Sainsbury discusses where the idea behind the film came from; Origins of the Film, the producers of the film discuss the origins of the film following their short film (Time) Travel Centre; Characters and the Cast, Tom Sainsbury introduces the cast; The Creature, featurette detailing how The Creature came to be; Production, the crew discuss the feature production; Cinematography, producer and Director of Photography Milon Tesiram discusses the look of the film; Original Score, composer Mike Newport discusses the score; The Hut, featurette on the construction and design of the cabin; Eyers Forest Park Promo, promotional video for the Eyers Forest Park trails; (Time) Travel Centre, Tom Sainsbury’s 2016 short film, winner of the 48Hours Film Festival; Image gallery.

Verdict: 7 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026

Starring: Indy (as himself), Shane Jensen, Arielle Friedman.    

Directed by Ben Leonberg        

Visions Home Video

February 2026

Indy has been with his owner Todd since he was a pup. They are 'Buds' and have a strong connection: best friends and inseparable. When Todd's grandfather dies, they take over his remote and rather creepy house, despite the protests of Todd's sister, because he is ill and shouldn't exert himself. Immediately, Indy begins to sense dark shadows and indistinct, frightening humanoid shapes. As time goes on it escalates, along with Todd's illness, as he coughs-up blood, passes out and loses touch with his true character. Indy, though terrorised himself, is desperate to protect his friend and master, but a dark malevolence seeks to separate them and drag Todd into the darkness.

This is a totally original horror film in that it takes place entirely from the point of view of the dog, Indy. That's so refreshing. Director Ben Leonberg and Actor Shane Jenson have thought totally outside of the box - even though it took them three years to do so. This innovative new sub-genre is not all about CGI whizzes and bangs; instead, it is a taut horror/suspense which tweaks several emotions, such as sympathy, sorrow, trepidation, eeriness, panic and sheer fright. Indeed, a couple of the creepiest moments are nightmare sequences endured by the dog.

There is a very small cast: aside from the brief hospital scene, there is only a nearby landowner, Todd's sister (who is never seen clearly; i.e. on the telephone, and once in person - indistinct against the sun), Todd and, of course, Indy. The dog was intended to be the star from the beginning and, boy, does he shine. Indy is excellent. I can't complement him enough. You may think it is cruel to put a dog through this, but the truth is - as you'll see from the extras sequence - the dog had no idea he was making a movie, because his reactions and movements were captured separately. Watch it and you'll see what I mean. This movie was very carefully constructed. It's effective and, at 73 minutes, doesn't outstay its welcome. It's not surprising that Good Boy has already won an award.

Extras Include: Making an Indy Film: BTS Featurette; Theatrical Trailer.

Verdict: 7 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026

Starring: Isabelle Adjani, Sam Neill.    

Directed by Andrzej Żuławski       

Second Sight Films

December 2025

Anna and Mark's marriage is on the rocks - to say the least. It has degenerated into a chaotic ritual of shouting, physical and mental violence, and even self-abuse. Matters are further exacerbated when Anna starts to go missing on a frequent basis, and mark is left alone to care for her son. Mark soon discovers that Anna has a lover called Heinrich, whom he traces and confronts. The man is strange and sadistic, and thinks he has Anna under control. However, the two men soon learn they are both being duped for another mysterious lover. Becoming increasingly unhinged, Anna is compelled to regularly make love to a tentacled creature that must be protected at all cost...

This is a strange one. Polish director Andrzej Zulawski's projects have always caused controversy. He was practically prevented from making films in Poland during the days of Communism. He was persuaded to move to France, where he continued his trade.

Possession was written after the director's own marriage break-up due to a third party. The film was nominated for a BAFTA, but soon became a banned 'video nasty'. It can certainly be viewed at different levels, and will certainly mean something different to individual groups. On the surface it is a movie about the extremities of adultery. I saw it more as a descent into madness. Zulawski intended it as a political allegory. There are also somewhat stronger religious connotations inherent in the story. Most promoters saw it as a rather unsavoury horror.

Although Possession is fourty-four years old now, it's still shocking in places. The two lead performances are strong. Sam Neill's performance is edgy and totally convincing, and Isabelle Adjani's portrayal of Anna is... well, it has to be seen to be believed. The film can be seen as an allegory of hurt, deception, entrapment and longing. Simply breathtaking and deeply disturbing.

A quote from Mark Kermode on the publicity release will always be an eye-catcher, as he is easily the best film critic around (apart from me, of course!).

Love it or hate it, Possession simply can't be ignored. It deserves its place in film history, but will only appeal to collectors. It's evident that mainstream viewers are going to exclaim, "What the hell was all that about!?" and dismiss it out of turn.

I'm not sure if the crisper picture improves the mood of the piece or throws too much light on what should never be completely seen outside of the viewer's subconscious mind. Is this an art-piece abstract work, or a monster movie descent into madness? You decide. But look out for The Horror of Normality: Guillermo del Toro on Possession - on the extras.

Extras Include: A new 4K restoration approved by the Producer; Includes the North American Re-edit: newly restored from an archive print; New Audio Commentary by Alexandra Heller-Nicholas and Alison Taylor; Audio Commentary by Director Andrzej Żuławski moderated by Daniel Bird; Audio Commentary by Frederic Tuten moderated by Daniel Bird; New Audio Commentary by Daniel Bird and Manuela Lazic (The North American Re-edit); The Horror of Normality: Guillermo del Toro on Possession; The Shadow We Carry: Kat Ellinger on Possession; Repossessed: The Film’s UK and US reception; Andrzej Żuławski - Director: archive documentary; A Divided City: The Berlin locations; The Sounds of Possession: an interview with Composer Andrzej Korzynski; Our Friend in the West: an interview with Producer Christian Ferry; Basha: a featurette on poster artist Barbara ‘Basha’ Baranowska; The Other Side of The Wall: The Making of Possession; Archive interview with Andrzej Żuławski; Deleted Scenes; Theatrical Trailer.

Verdict: 7 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026

Starring: Nicholas Cage, Brendan Meyer, Elliot Knight, Joely Richardson, Madeleine Arthur.    

Directed and co-written by Richard Stanley (Based on the Story The Colour Out of Space, by H.P. Lovecraft).      

StudioCanal

April 2020

Nathan Gardner (Nicholas Cage) moves his wife Teresa (Joely Richardson), adolescent son Benny (Brendan Meyer) and daughter Lavinia (Madeleine Arthur), and young son Jack (Julian Hilliard) to a remote farmstead in Massachusetts, not far from Arkham. It is a chance for a new, healthier, self-sustaining life, and the hope that a more relaxed existence will aid his wife's fight against a dehabilitating illness.

When a meteorite hits their land close to the house, the local authorities are called from Arkham to check it out - only to lose interest when it appears to disintegrate overnight. However, the meteor from space has left something behind: a mysterious organism which immediately begins to affect the ecosystem. The animals are the first to sense trouble, being almost permanently spooked, and their pet dog snarls confrontationally, seemingly at nothing in particular. There is a weird glow emanating from the well and young Jack apparently converses with something unseen. Ward Phillips is a young man concerned with the water table. He takes a liking to Lavinia and advises them all not to drink the water. Is it too late though? The entire area is infused with a thick, cloying hue of purple and deep magenta. The fruits grow large and in abundance, but are putrescent to the taste. Furthermore, the dominant new cosmic organism has begun to affect and change the family.

Let me first address the elephant in the room. This film is based on an H.P. Lovecraft story first published in Amazing Stories in 1927. It is one of his most well-known and appreciated written tales of cosmic horror. Americans spell Colour without a 'u' but, although Lovecraft was American he preffered the Old English spelling of the word. So, in this context, it is spelled incorrectly here, because it is not the precise spelling of Lovecraft's story.

Nevertheless, this is the closest representation of Lovecraft's seminal story I have seen committed to film (Die, Monster, Die! from 1965 is more loosely themed, but it does have a well and a plant creature growing in the geenhouse - like you do!). Thick layers of oppression are dropped on the atmosphere here throughout the running time. It does work but, because the characters are affected very early on, we don't get to experience enough of their normal personalities to be able to plainly notice the changes in the way they think and act as the plot progresses. It is very well made, though, with nice CGI effects and physical body horror. I don't think any straight adaptation of Lovecraft's work ever reaches the heights of his atmospheric prose, which is why original Lovecraftian influences tend to work much better on film (Event Horizon and John Carpenter's In the Mouth of Madness are two examples).

Many people seem to have a take-him-or-leave-him, fly attitude towards Nicholas Cage. I have a lot of respect for the man: having lost an extravagant fortune via an investment financial crash, rather than file for bankruptcy he meticulously began to pay back his losses and embarked on an extremely heavy workload. Not being a so-called 'A' List actor enables him not to price himself out of the market and to take more interesting roles. Okay, he's not the most charismatic actor but he is compelling and can turn his hands to most genres.

Richard Stanley directs this one with finesse and a fair amount of atmosphere. It's a film which you can appreciate without wishing to actively return to too many times. He also directed Mandy, and you can immediately spot the similarities of style... and hue! I hope to review that one soon, too (is it a sci-fi, a horror, a revenge thriller? - yes, all of those). If you enjoy the horror classics and haven't tried H.P. Lovecraft, I urge you to give him a go (expect lots of atmosphere and a clever steady build-up of tension).

Extras: NONE. Can you believe that in this day and age? One point has been dropped from my rating for this omission.

Verdict: 7 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026

Starring:  Matsushima Nanako, Daisuke Ban, Yukie Nakama, Risa Goto.    

Directed by Hideo Nakata

(Based on the Novel by Koji Suzuki).      

Arrow Video

June 2019

In Memory of Koji Suzuki - who sadly passed away in May 2026 - the Japanese Horror Icon who wrote The Ring (Ringu) and many other groundbreaking horror novels.

After a schoolgirl dies in a rictus of terror a female journalist called Asakawa investigates the modern legend of a video which kills the viewer after a week. She discovers that four friends stayed at a cabin, watched a video and died a week later. When she traces the cabin, she finds the video and watches a series of strange images surrounding a well, a woman in a mirror and an eruption. Immediately it is finished the phone rings and she knows she only has a week to live.

The woman in the mirror is discovered to be Shizuko. More than 30 years earlier a Dr Ikuma had arranged a demonstration of her E.S.P. for the press. The results were amazing, but one reporter started a near riot by calling the test a hoax. The reporter dropped dead, but Shizuko was as surprised as anyone and realised it was her daughter Sadako, who had been in hiding. People called Sadako a monster as people often died around her. When Shizuko died Dr Ikuma adopted her as his illegitimate child. Now, Asakawa is searching for answers in a race against time which is made more desperate when she learns her little boy has watched the video. She guesses that Sadako was killed and sealed in the well, and thinks that if she finds the body her life will be saved. But what if that doesn't end the curse and her time runs out?

Ring made quite an impact when it first emerged in 1998. Hideo Nakata gave us something almost totally different to what we had become accustomed to. It's essentially a ghost story, but gives us both new and old legends as well as an investigation against the clock. The American remake, although pretty good, failed to recapture the pace and storytelling skills of this Japanese original. Nakata's groundbreaking horror is creepy whilst remaining tasteful. Unlike many Hollywood directors he also knows how to command the scenario of time running out. One or two people about to die somehow carries more tension than an entire facility, or indeed the entire world, going up in flames. The suspense of being trapped on an island during a storm with little more than a day remaining is very well handled, as is the draining of the well as the sun sets outside.

Asakawa, the journalist from the first, film is missing and her ex-husband, thought saved, is dead. The body of Sadako has been recovered from the well. The pathologist explains that Sadako has only been dead for a year or two, which means she was alive for 30 years sealed inside. The father of Asakawa is found dead at his house. It is rumoured that the only way to survive the curse if you have seen the video is to make a copy and show it to somebody else within a week. It is thought that she sacrificed her father to save her son. After a number of curious sightings the boy is found. It turns out that, like all those affected by the curse, he has developed some terrifying powers from Sadako. A research scientist explains that the video is the embodiment of Sadako's fury, and that Yoichi, the boy has some of that same fury. But an experiment to drain it off goes disastrously wrong...

This film continues the story pretty much from where the last one left off. Asakawa and Yoichi, her son, have to be found, and when they are Yoichi becomes the main focus of the story, although his powers are linked inextricably to Sadako. Ring 2 from 1999, also by Hideo Nakata, follows a similar format of investigation interspersed with off-kilter links into the nightmare world of Sadaka. The scene at the pool when the water is used in an attempt to soak up Yoichi's fury is quite spooky. A journalist colleague of Asakawa climbs the inside of the well, with Yoichi clinging on, whilst Sadaka pursues her at an alarming rate. When she reaches the top it is to emerge from beneath the water of the pool.

In this prequel to the first film, Dr Ikuma and Sadako have disappeared after the events of the E.S.P. demonstration. Another reporter called Miyaji is trying to trace them. After complaining about seeing strange things, Sadako later tells her therapist that a drama troupe she has joined has helped her condition. However, although Sadako finds love for the first time, most people keep away from her because she is unusual and aloof. Two of the actors have a dream with a well in it, and see someone approaching Sadako from behind. One of them dies in the drama hall with a hideous expression on her face. The production continues with Sadako being given the lead part, but when Miyaji and one of the troupe try to kill her there are unforeseen consequences...

Whilst Ring 0 - Birthday from 2000 (by Norio Tsurunta) doesn't have as many set piece edge-of-the-seat moments, it does achieve much in explaining some of the unanswered questions created by the first two films. We see Sadaka in the days leading up to her death; all the troublesome moments appear to come from a third party and she herself pleads innocence without explaining why. The end sequence is quite inventive and I wonder if Nakata himself sanctioned this twist to the whole saga.

Spiral is sometimes referred to as the lost sequel to the first film. It emerged in the same year - and is somewhat closer to Suzuki's novel - but failed to make a similar impact. Although planned as the original sequel to Ring, and screened regularly as a double-bill, negative audience feedback meant that it disappeared virtually overnight to be replaced by the 'official' sequel Ring 2. Spiral certainly has its moments, being well-worth a watch; however, it is guilty of attempting to delve too much into Sadaka's back story, which is one of the reasons it is a little messy. An exact adaptation of a novel doesn't always work - especially when much of the pertinent story has been told. I see this as a bonus addition to the trilogy; it is of interest historically, but is not to the standard of the others.

I reviewed the Tartan DVD release of the trilogy back in 2004 for reviewgraveyard. That one had the hidden and unannounced bonus of a exellent year 2000 film by Hideo Nakata called Sleeping Bride, which was almost worth the entrance fee (as they say) by itself. These four films, however, are all in glorious HD, with a number of entertaining extra features. The first film Ring is also available on a 2025 4K release - with a Limited Edition Region Free 4K Collector's Set having been released two years earlier. Do yourself a favour and add this to your collection, if you can. And be careful not to pick up the sub-standard American remakes by mistake.

Extras Include: Brand new 4K restoration of Ring from the original camera negative, approved by director of photography Junichiro Hayashi, High Definition Blu-ray (1080p) presentations, Lossless Japanese DTS-HD master audio 5.1 and PCM 2.0 soundtracks, Optional English subtitles; Bonus feature: Spiral, George Iida's 1998 sequel to Ring; New audio commentary on Ring by film historian David Kalat; New audio commentary on Ring 0 by author and critic Alexandra Heller-Nicholas; The Ring Legacy, a series of new interviews from critics and filmmakers on their memories of the Ring series and ints enduring legacy; A Vicious Circle, anew video interview with author and critic Kat Ellinger on the career of Hideo Nakata; Circumnavigating Ring, a new video essay by critic Jasper Sharp on the J-horror phenomenon; The Psychology of Fear, a newly edited archival interview with author Koji Suzuki; Archival behind-the-scenes featurette on Ring 0; Ring 0 deleted scenes; Sadako's video; Multiple theatrical trailers for the Ring series.

Verdict: 10 out of 10

Original review by Ty Power 2026