'Ghosts of Darkness' drew me into seeing it, with a cool and creepy poster, an intriguing idea with a potentially relatable central relationship and as someone with a general appreciation for horror. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there, made me though apprehensive. Actually found 'Ghosts of Darkness' fairly watchable, if not an easy film to rate or review. Had to think long and hard about what my thoughts were and how to articulate them. 'Ghosts of Darkness' is not great, or good, has a fair share of problems (fairly big ones too) and doesn't do enough with its potential, which was hardly small. There are however a number of decent, even good, qualities in 'Ghosts of Darkness', at least it wasn't intelligence insulting or inept (unlike some films seen recently) and the potential is not completely squandered.Lets start with the positives. The scenery is very atmospheric, likewise with the very nice way it's shot. The music is suitably spooky and quirky and doesn't distract at all from the atmosphere, while not exactly enhancing it. Some of the acting is better than average, particularly the breath of fresh air that is Paul Flanery who really livens things up. There are some genuinely scary and suspenseful moments and the atmosphere has creepiness.However, the story does feel over-stretched and some of it feels vague, under-explained. The more 'Ghosts of Darkness' progresses, the duller, more predictable, more senseless and less scary, and too many characters are too sketchy. Other actors don't fare so well, with Michael Koltes being a truly lifeless lead.Dialogue can be stilted while the pace is uneven, dragging in some of the second half. The humour is also variable, parts are funny while others are cheesy and misplaced. Found the supposedly shocking moments not so surprising and the end felt incomplete and not much of a climax. Overall, not bad at all while leaving me a bit lukewarm. 5/10 Bethany Cox

It should be rated much more higher on overall ratings.I don't like to reveal the story and I won't..... Because If I did, I would Spoil the Fun....BUT the STORY. 8 / 10.... Good Mystery and Horror ACTING 8 /10.... Loved itDIRECTION 8 /10..... Really Good JobMUSIC 8 / 10..... The Music makes you get into the movie even more.OVERALL FILM 7.5 / 10 In the end a Good Film about a haunted mansion and the mystery is why they are invited there and what happens eventually..... WATCH IT TO KNOW.... I Enjoyed it and So Shall You..... Guaranteed.... A MUST WATCH.... Thanks For Reading... Thumps up if it was helpful.. ENJOY 😊

Firstly the positives: the poster, awesome. Very Army of Darkness feel. Secondly: Paul Flannery - delivery was great, just a hint of light-heartedness & gravitas. Thirdly: cinematography was good - not enough dark or shadows but generally OK. . Sadly that's where the positives stop. . Unfortunately Michael Koltes was flat & delivery was ordinary. His timing & tone need work. His facial expression was just as flat. There was a lot of "Dean Winchester" style about the character without the bluster, fun or aggression. . The story was fairly typical of this type of movie & had potential to be a fun/action movie. . Certainly not the best movie nor the worst.

The is a UK low budget horror movie so when I say surprisingly good I am referencing the word budget from many angles.The two relatively unknown actors carry virtually the whole film between them... No mean feat... And they do it very well.The story isn't bad, the suspense is good, the creepiness is well timed and the scares are well launched.I would go as far as to say I would watch it again in time and I would certainly recommend to friends.