Tag Archives: folk horror

Horror Review: The Ritual (dir. by David Bruckner)

Posted on by Arleigh

“Oh, this is awful in almost every conceivable way.” — Phil

David Bruckner’s The Ritual turns a seemingly straightforward hiking-trip nightmare into a bleak, character-driven story about grief, guilt, and the fear of being judged by the worst thing you have ever done. Released in 2017, the film takes the familiar setup of friends becoming lost during a hiking trip and turns it into something far more tense, emotionally bruised, and unsettling. It is part of the wave of folk horror that began emerging in the late 2000s, with filmmakers returning to remote landscapes, old belief systems, pagan imagery, and the frightening idea that modern people are badly unprepared for places ruled by ancient customs. The Ritual contains the expected genre material—an ominous Scandinavian forest, strange symbols, a decaying cabin, and an isolated community—but its real strength is how tightly those elements connect to its characters’ unresolved guilt and resentment.

The film follows Luke, played by Rafe Spall, who is still deeply traumatized by the death of his friend Rob. In the opening sequence, Luke and Rob enter a liquor store after a night out and become caught in the middle of a robbery. Luke hides while Rob is killed trying to resist the attackers. It is an immediately harsh and effective opening because the film does not treat Luke’s inaction as something simple or easy to judge. He is terrified, frozen, and unable to process the situation. Even so, he cannot forgive himself for surviving. That moment becomes the defining wound of his life, and everything that happens afterward pushes him back toward it.

Luke eventually joins Phil, Dom, and Hutch on a hiking trip through Sweden that is meant to honor Rob’s memory. It becomes clear early on that the group’s friendship is not as solid as it once was. They know each other well enough to trade jokes and insults, but there is a lot of buried frustration underneath the banter. When Dom injures his knee, he argues that they should take a shortcut through the forest rather than continue along the longer established trail. The decision makes sense on a practical level, but it puts them in a setting where the normal rules of direction, distance, and safety quickly stop applying. The trip that is supposed to help them mourn Rob instead becomes a pressure cooker for every unresolved issue they have with one another.

That tension is what makes the first half of The Ritual more interesting than a routine “people get lost in the woods” movie. The men are not written as interchangeable victims waiting for the plot to remove them one by one. They have the worn-down chemistry of friends who have known one another for years but may have outgrown the version of themselves that first brought them together. Luke is defensive and emotionally closed off. Dom can be abrasive, especially when pain and fear make him more volatile. Phil is cynical and exhausted. Hutch is the closest thing the group has to a stabilizing influence, but even he cannot keep the old resentments from surfacing.

Bruckner gives their arguments a messy, lived-in quality. They do not stop to explain their entire friendship history for the audience; instead, the viewer picks up on it through accusations, half-finished insults, and the way everyone reacts when Rob’s death comes up. Luke’s guilt is the most obvious source of conflict, but the others are carrying their own anger toward him as well. They cannot openly say what they think without admitting that they may blame him for what happened. As the hike becomes more dangerous, that tension becomes harder to contain. The film understands that fear makes people meaner, more selfish, and more honest than they want to be.

The Swedish wilderness is easily one of the movie’s greatest assets. Bruckner and cinematographer Andrew Shulkind make the forest feel huge and claustrophobic at the same time. The woods are not shot like a scenic tourist destination. They are wet, dark, muddy, and disorienting, filled with thin trees that block the characters’ view and make every direction seem identical. The lack of clear landmarks matters because it slowly strips the group of confidence. At first, they are annoyed hikers trying to save time. Before long, they are struggling to tell where they have been, where they are going, or whether the forest is allowing them to leave at all.

The film excels at building dread through details rather than relying on constant jolts. The friends discover unnerving signs scattered through the woods: an animal carcass hanging impossibly high in the trees, crude figures made from sticks, unfamiliar markings, and evidence that somebody—or something—has been watching them. One of the most memorable sequences takes place in an abandoned cabin that the group uses for shelter. Inside, they find a grotesque shrine and signs of an old ritualistic practice that seem completely out of place in the modern world. The scene is disturbing because of how wrong it feels. These men have not just stumbled into an empty house; they have crossed into a space defined by beliefs they do not understand.

That atmosphere is where The Ritual most clearly earns its place in modern folk horror. The movie is not simply interested in isolated woods as a convenient backdrop for scares. It treats the forest as a place with a history and a set of rules that exist independently of the characters. Luke, Dom, Phil, and Hutch arrive with backpacks, maps, phones, and ordinary personal problems, but those things become almost useless once the landscape begins to feel hostile. Their modern routines and assumptions do not protect them. The horror comes partly from the idea that they are outsiders who have entered a world where their explanations mean nothing.

The later sections introduce an isolated group whose beliefs are rooted in an older, more ritualized worldview. This element can feel more direct than the earlier ambiguity, but it still fits the movie’s larger themes. The people Luke encounters represent a twisted alternative to the kind of shame and grief that have been consuming him. Their world offers a warped version of survival: submit to fear, accept the rules, and give up the parts of yourself that make resistance possible. It is an ugly kind of community, one that turns spiritual tradition into coercion and treats personal suffering as something to be exploited.

Rafe Spall is the key to why the film works as more than an exercise in atmosphere. Luke is not an idealized horror protagonist. He is stubborn, defensive, and sometimes hard to like, particularly when he tries to avoid talking about Rob. But Spall makes his guilt feel immediate and human. Luke is not haunted just because he saw someone die; he is haunted because he believes that his failure in that moment reveals who he really is. The forest repeatedly forces him to confront that belief through hallucinatory transitions that blur the wilderness with the liquor-store robbery. Doors in the forest become entrances to the shop. The wooded darkness gives way to fluorescent aisles. Luke seems to be reliving the same failure from different angles, unable to escape the moment he most wishes he could change.

Those surreal flashbacks are some of Bruckner’s best directing choices. They are visually simple but highly effective, placing Luke’s internal guilt directly into the physical environment around him. The movie never turns into a vague psychological-horror story that dismisses everything as a dream, but it uses Luke’s trauma to make the supernatural setting feel more personal. The threat in the woods is frightening because it seems to recognize his weakness. It does not just want to harm him; it wants him to surrender to the version of himself that he already hates.

If The Ritual has a flaw, it is that the final act loses a little of the earlier section’s mystery once the film begins explaining more about what is happening in the forest. The strongest passages are often the quietest ones: the men arguing while lost, the unsettling evidence in the trees, the cabin sequence, and the growing suspicion that they are being pushed in a direction they cannot understand. Still, the conclusion works because it brings the movie back to Luke’s personal struggle. His escape is not simply about reaching safety. It is about refusing to let guilt define his identity forever.

By the end, The Ritual delivers a satisfying sense of catharsis without pretending that Luke has been completely healed. He survives an experience that forces him to face the fear he has been carrying since Rob’s death, but that does not erase the loss or make him a different person overnight. What changes is his willingness to stop living as though one terrible moment has permanently decided who he is. That emotional resolution gives the film more weight than many survival-horror stories.

Overall, The Ritual is a smart, atmospheric, and surprisingly character-driven horror film. Its strongest qualities are its oppressive forest setting, its believable group dynamics, its gradual escalation, and Rafe Spall’s deeply uncomfortable performance. Most importantly, it recognizes that folk horror becomes powerful when the ancient and supernatural elements expose something painfully human. Bruckner turns a memorial hike into a nightmare about guilt, masculinity, friendship, and the terror of being unable to outrun your own past.

Horror Film Review: Kill List (dir. by Ben Wheatley)

Posted on by Arleigh

“It doesn’t feel wrong. They’re bad people. They deserve to suffer.” — Jay

There is something especially unsettling about a horror film that refuses to let you know it is a horror film until you are already trapped inside it. Ben Wheatley’s Kill List begins in the familiar, grimy territory of a British crime thriller, but its slow, deliberate transformation into full-blown cosmic and folk horror makes it one of the most unnerving films of the 2010s.

Jay, a former soldier turned contract killer, has been out of work for months after a botched assignment in Kyiv. His wife Shel is fed up with his anger, his drinking, and his lack of direction. Their marriage is strained, their finances are collapsing, and their home feels less like a place of comfort than a pressure cooker waiting to explode. Rather than starting with a monster, a murder, or a flashy supernatural hook, Kill List starts with domestic tension. It places the audience in a home where every conversation feels like it could become a screaming match, and every small complaint seems connected to a much larger emotional wound.

That grounded, unpleasant realism is a huge part of why Kill List works so well. Wheatley does not rush to tell the audience what kind of movie they are watching. For a while, it plays almost like a rough, deeply uncomfortable British domestic drama, with the sort of bickering and passive-aggressive resentment that feels overheard rather than scripted. Jay and Shel’s arguments are messy, mean, and often funny in a dark way, while Jay’s friendship with his old colleague Gal has a lived-in quality. These are not glamorous movie hitmen trading cool one-liners. They are middle-aged men with bills to pay, bad tempers, old wounds, and a job they would probably rather not be doing if they had any other viable option.

Jay’s decision to accept a new killing contract with Gal initially pushes Kill List further into thriller territory. The assignment comes from a wealthy, unsettling client who hires them to eliminate three targets: a priest, a librarian, and a member of Parliament. That setup sounds straightforward enough, and Wheatley lets the film function for a time like a grimy, morally rotten crime thriller. Jay and Gal investigate their targets, plan their attacks, and move through a world of rural estates, anonymous offices, abandoned buildings, and shadowy back rooms. There is tension, but it is the tension of men entering dangerous situations without knowing whether they are being watched or manipulated.

What makes the film increasingly unnerving is that every target seems to know more than Jay and Gal do. The victims do not merely fear death. In some cases, they appear grateful for it. They refer to Jay as though he has been expected, almost as if he has been chosen for a role he does not understand. The priest calls him “the harbinger,” while the librarian thanks him after being killed. These details are not explained in a neat, comforting way. Wheatley plants them casually, allowing confusion to gather in the background while Jay becomes more violent, unstable, and paranoid.

That gradual descent is what makes Kill List so effective. It starts off more like a thriller, or even a bleak crime drama, but slowly makes its way into full-blown horror by the time the end credits begin rolling. The film does not suddenly flip a switch and announce that it has become a supernatural nightmare. Instead, it lets the atmosphere become stranger one scene at a time. A symbol appears carved into a mirror. A strange man silently watches from the woods. A dinner party turns from awkward to deeply hostile. A pair of masked figures emerge at the edge of a field. By the time the movie reaches its final stretch, the feeling is no longer one of criminal danger but of being trapped inside a ritual that began long before Jay understood he was involved.

Wheatley’s direction is crucial here. Kill List has a raw, handheld, low-budget immediacy that makes the violence feel especially ugly. There is very little stylization separating the audience from what is happening. The film is not interested in making murder look slick, cathartic, or exciting. When Jay attacks someone, it feels brutal, chaotic, and emotionally damaging. The violence is often sudden, but it is never casual. It leaves a stain on the scene, on the characters, and on the viewer. Jay’s behavior becomes increasingly alarming because his anger is not framed as toughness. It is framed as a dangerous loss of control.

Neil Maskell gives an excellent performance as Jay, a man whose emotional state is always sitting somewhere between numbness and eruption. He is not an easy protagonist to like, and that is part of the point. Jay can be cruel, childish, frightening, and self-destructive. Yet Maskell also makes him feel recognizably human, especially in the quieter moments with his son, Sam. Those scenes matter because they give the final act its real emotional weight. Jay is not just a professional killer being targeted by an unknown force; he is a husband and father whose damaged life is about to be pulled into something far worse than a failed job.

Michael Smiley is equally strong as Gal, who initially comes across as the more stable, reasonable half of the duo. He is calmer than Jay, more socially functional, and less openly volatile. But the movie gradually reveals that Gal has his own weaknesses and blind spots. Their friendship feels genuine, even when it is poisoned by secrecy, resentment, and the increasingly bizarre circumstances surrounding the contract. MyAnna Buring also deserves credit as Shel. She could have easily been reduced to the stereotypical nagging wife in a lesser film, but Buring makes her sharp, vulnerable, manipulative at times, and visibly exhausted by the life she shares with Jay.

The horror in Kill List becomes especially potent because it draws from both cosmic and folk-horror traditions without fully settling into either one. The cult imagery, hidden rituals, strange symbols, rural landscapes, and anonymous masked figures all give the film a folk-horror texture. There is a distinctly British unease to the countryside in the final act: fields that should feel open instead feel isolating, and a rural community becomes a place where ancient, secretive violence can exist just out of sight. At the same time, the movie’s cosmic-horror side comes from the sense that Jay has stumbled into a system too vast and unknowable for him to comprehend. He thinks he is taking a contract. In reality, he may be participating in a process that has been designed around him from the beginning.

That sense of predestination is one of the film’s most disturbing qualities. Kill List never overexplains the cult, its beliefs, or exactly how much control it has over the characters’ lives. Some viewers may find that frustrating, especially because the ending refuses to provide a clean mythology or a tidy resolution. But that ambiguity is also why the film lingers. The cult is scary not because the audience receives a detailed rulebook, but because its reach appears to be everywhere. It can infiltrate a job, a social gathering, a family home, and even the choices Jay believes he is making freely.

The ending is famously shocking, but it is not shocking only because of its cruelty. It works because the movie has carefully built Jay into a man who responds to fear with rage and violence. The final revelation turns that trait against him in the most devastating possible way. It is bleak, tragic, and almost mythic in its nastiness. The final image does not feel like a twist for the sake of a twist. It feels like the horrifying completion of a ritual that the audience has been watching take shape without fully recognizing it.

Kill List is not a comfortable watch, and it is not a horror movie that tries to please the audience with easy scares or a reassuring explanation. Its slow burn can feel deliberately abrasive, especially in the early domestic scenes, but that patience pays off. Wheatley takes a grim thriller about two hitmen and gradually transforms it into a nightmare of conspiracy, fate, cult ritual, cosmic dread, and folk-horror menace. By the end, the film has moved so far from its seemingly familiar premise that it feels like the ground has disappeared beneath it. That is what makes Kill List so memorable: it does not simply become horrifying. It reveals that horror was there all along, hiding inside every uneasy conversation, every unexplained symbol, and every choice Jay thought was his own.

Villain of the Day: Matthew Hopkins (Witchfinder General)

Posted on by Arleigh

“Men sometimes have strange motives for the things they do.” — Matthew Hopkins

In the pantheon of folk horror, few antagonists are as unsettling as Matthew Hopkins, brought to life with chilling restraint by Vincent Price in Michael Reeves’s 1968 masterpiece, Witchfinder General. While Hopkins was a very real historical figure who terrorized 17th-century England, Price’s portrayal reimagines him not as a raving religious zealot, but as a shockingly mundane monster. He navigates the war-torn countryside with a terrifying blend of sleaze and sophistication. It is precisely this departure from the supernatural madman archetype—replacing it with a grounded, opportunistic con artist—that makes Price’s Hopkins such a uniquely repellent figure. He is a villain who doesn’t haunt your dreams with dark magic, but rather with the cold, calculated reality of systemic corruption.

The “urbane” quality of Price’s Hopkins is his most disarming weapon. Dressed immaculately and speaking with a measured, aristocratic cadence, he brings a veneer of courtly civility to the muddy, blood-soaked villages he targets. He does not shout or rave about the devil; instead, he politely asks for lodging, drinks wine, and discusses his gruesome work with the detached professionalism of a bureaucrat. This refinement creates a jarring cognitive dissonance for the audience. Hopkins isn’t some wild-eyed backwoods fanatic; he is an educated, well-groomed gentleman, which makes his descent into barbarism feel all the more invasive. His urbane nature acts as a mask, legitimizing his presence in the homes of both the gentry and the peasantry, allowing him to get close to his victims before the trap springs shut.

Yet, beneath this polished exterior lies a profound and inescapable sleaziness. Price imbues Hopkins with a predatory, voyeuristic gaze that transforms his legal authority into a tool for personal gratification. This is most evident in his interactions with Sara Lowes, where his polite requests quickly curdle into thinly veiled threats of sexual coercion. He uses his position to isolate vulnerable women, leveraging their fear of torture and death to extract sexual favors under the guise of “interrogation.” Furthermore, his method of operation—finding a woman accused of witchcraft, accepting bribes from her terrified relatives to spare her, and then executing her anyway to collect the standard fee from the local magistrate—is the epitome of sleazy grifting. He is a lecher and an extortionist hiding behind the cloak of the law.

What truly cements Hopkins’ status as a villain, however, is his complete lack of genuine belief in the very witchcraft he prosecutes. Unlike so many cinematic inquisitors driven mad by religious fervor or a sincere desire to purge evil, Hopkins is a pure opportunist. He views the mass hysteria of the era merely as an untapped market. Witchfinding is not a holy crusade for him; it is a lucrative business model. He carries a manual that dictates exactly how much he can charge per town, treating human life as a commodity to be tallied in a ledger. By stripping away any ideological justification for his actions, Reeves and Price reveal a far more terrifying truth: the greatest evils are often committed not by true believers, but by cynical men who exploit the beliefs of others for power and profit.

In a profoundly unsettling way, Hopkins’ brand of opportunistic parasitism has not been consigned to the history books; if anything, characters exactly like him are even more prevalent in today’s society. We are surrounded by modern-day “witchfinders”—sleazy yet urbane grifters, pundits, and political operatives who latch onto powerful men and disruptive ideologies like parasites. They feed on societal fears, anxieties, and moral panics, weaponizing the culture wars not because they genuinely care about the causes they champion, but to further their own agendas, sell books, and secure lucrative media contracts. Just as Hopkins peddled false accusations of Satanism to line his pockets amid the chaos of the English Civil War, today’s opportunists monetize outrage and exploit divisions for clout and capital. Vincent Price’s brilliant, restrained performance endures because it holds up a dark, timeless mirror to human nature, reminding us that the most dangerous monsters are rarely the true believers, but rather the charming, well-dressed opportunists profiting off the fears of everyone else.

Villain of the Day

Review: Apostle (dir. by Gareth Evans)

Posted on by Arleigh

“She’s no god. She’s just a machine.” — Quinn

Apostle is one of those films that feels like Gareth Evans deliberately swerved away from the kinetic precision of The Raid and The Raid 2, as if to test whether he could still dominate the screen without back‑to‑back martial‑arts set pieces. The result is not a clean crowd‑pleaser, but a grim, blood‑soaked folk‑horror descent that trades velocity for dread, atmosphere, and the slow peeling away of civilized surfaces until what’s left is pure cruelty. It’s ambitious, dense, and at times unwieldy, but it is never the kind of hollow, algorithm‑friendly Netflix original that feels assembled by committee. The film leans into a slow‑burn approach, letting its cult setting and religious unease simmer before it erupts into something truly grotesque.

Set in 1905, Apostle follows Thomas Richardson, played by Dan Stevens with the exact right mix of haunted intensity and bruised arrogance, as he infiltrates a remote island cult to rescue his kidnapped sister. That setup sounds straightforward enough, but Evans uses it as a trapdoor into a much uglier story about faith, coercion, exploitation, and the grotesque systems people build when belief curdles into power. The cult is not merely spooky window dressing; it’s a functioning social organism with labor, hierarchy, punishment, and ritual, which gives the film a more grounded menace than a simple haunted‑house scenario. The island’s wrongness is not just in its rituals, but in the way ordinary domestic life has been turned into a kind of ongoing penance.

What makes Apostle compelling is how patiently Evans allows the island to breathe before he starts tearing it apart. The first half is almost methodical in the way it maps the place: the political tension within the cult, the uneasy alliances, the daily routines, the controlled scarcity, and the sense that every face hides some compromise. That slow construction is crucial, because once the film starts revealing what the island is actually built on, the horror lands with more force. It does not chase jump scares; it lets the audience sit inside the wrongness until the wrongness starts to feel inevitable. The film’s real horror is in the way it treats belief as a system of control rather than a source of comfort.

Michael Sheen is the other major pillar here, and he gives the film a wickedly slippery center as Malcolm, the island’s charismatic prophet. Sheen plays him as part messiah, part salesman, part exhausted tyrant, which is exactly the right tone for a character whose authority depends on performance. He isn’t merely loud or theatrical; he’s persuasive, and that is much scarier. The film understands that the most dangerous religious figures are often not the ones who snarl the loudest, but the ones who can make oppression sound like purpose. Dan Stevens plays beautifully against that energy, keeping Thomas in a state of wary observation until desperation forces him into action. The two actors give the movie a dramatic spine sturdy enough to support all the blood and theology around them.

Evans’ direction is, unsurprisingly, the film’s great technical asset. Even when Apostle feels overloaded, it never feels careless. He stages the island as an environment of mud, wood, fog, and decay, and his eye for spatial clarity keeps the film legible even when the narrative starts layering on secrets and hidden machinery. If The Raid was about velocity and geometry, Apostle is about pressure and contamination. The violence, when it arrives, still carries the director’s unmistakable talent for framing brutality on screen: every blow lands with a clarity and weight that makes the gore feel integral rather than gratuitous. But in Apostle he deftly dips his filmmaking talents into the world of gothic folk horror, slotting his sensibility alongside classics like The Wicker Man, Witchfinder General, and The Witch. The island’s rituals, its mix of agrarian dread and religious paranoia, and its sense of a sealed community preparing for a bloody reckoning all echo those earlier works, while Evans colors them in his own grimy palette.

There’s also something interesting about how the film handles world‑building. It is overstuffed, yes, but it is overstuffed in a way that feels earned rather than random. The island has systems, factions, and ugly little bureaucracies of suffering, and the film keeps revealing new layers of control and corruption until the whole place feels like a machine designed to consume bodies and faith at the same time. Some viewers will see that density as a flaw, and they’re not entirely wrong; Apostle can feel a little overextended, as if Evans has too many ideas he wants to wring out of the same pressure cooker. But it could also be argued that the excess is part of the film’s personality. It’s not elegant horror. It’s horrified by its own abundance.

Thematically, Apostle works best when it treats religion not as a decorative taboo, but as a field of contesting desires. The film isn’t interested in simple anti‑faith provocation. Instead, it examines what happens when belief becomes a resource to be managed, weaponized, and monetized. The cult claims to reject corruption from the outside world, but its inner life is every bit as predatory, which makes the island feel less like an isolated aberration and more like a compressed version of the larger world Thomas came from. That’s one of the movie’s smartest ideas: the mainland and the island are different expressions of the same rot. The difference is only one of scale and visibility.

As a horror film, Apostle is strongest when it is patient and weakest when it has to juggle too many moving parts at once. The final stretch escalates into an effectively feral confrontation, but the movie occasionally risks losing the eerie precision of its setup in favor of sheer attritional chaos. Still, even that chaos has a purpose. Evans is not just trying to shock; he’s trying to show what happens when systems of belief collapse under the weight of their own lies. The result is messy, unpleasant, and often very good. It is also one of the more distinctive Netflix originals of its era, precisely because it refuses to be easy or tidy.

Apostle feels like a filmmaker known for kinetic precision making a movie about spiritual and social collapse, and the contradiction works in its favor. Even as he steps into the domain of gothic folk horror, Evans never loses his gift for filming violence or his sense of where the camera should sit in relation to pain. It has the rough edges of an ambitious film reaching for too much, but those edges are part of what makes it memorable. Part of the reason the film is underappreciated as quietly as it is may be that it arrived with a reputation attached: if Evans did not already have a name as a master of action filmmaking, Apostle might be celebrated more openly as a standalone horror achievement. Sometimes moving out of one’s comfort zone and still succeeding is exactly what gets held back by one’s reputation for what they’re “supposed” to be good at.

Between the bleak atmosphere, the commanding performances, the grim folk‑horror imagery, and Evans’ refusal to soften the ugliness of his subject, Apostle stands as a smart, vicious, and unusually committed piece of genre filmmaking. It may not be the Gareth Evans movie action fans expected, but it is very much the one horror fans deserved.

Quickie Review: Witchfinder General (dir. by Michael Reeves)

Posted on by Arleigh

The late 1960’s saw a major shift in horror films. There have always been horror films which had an inordinate amount of gore and violence, but were always relegated to the niche cinemas which catered to horror exploitation films. In 1968 it all changed with the release of George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead. Not only did this film graphically show gore and violence on the screen it also paired it with a well-told story. Another film which became infamous the very same year for it’s portrayal of torture, rape and sadism on the screen was British filmmaker Michael Reeves’ horror film, Witchfinder General.

Witchfinder General starred horror icon Vincent Price in the title role as Matthew Hopkins who was tasked as the Witchfinder General by the Cromwell government during the English Civil War of the 17th-century. His Hopkins would travel the region of East Anglia (Cromwell-controlled territory) rooting out witchcraft and sorcery wherever they might be found. Assisting him in this task is the thuggish, brute Stearne (played by Robert Russell) who relished in torturing suspected witches in towns the two visit. It’s during one such visit to the town of Brandeston, Suffolk that Hopkins and Stearne begin a sequence of events which would pit them against the soldier Richard Marshall (who also happens to fight on the same side as Hopkins and Stearne) whose fiancee and her uncle became the latest victims of the Witchfinder General’s sadistic methods of rooting out confessions.

The film as a horror has less to do with the supernatural, but more of the hypocritical horror which begets a political environment where powerful men contest for more power and uses fear and the superstitious ignorance of a populace to cement their power. In this amoral vacuum comes in the opportunistic Matthew Hopkins who uses the power given to him by his government to not just do his duty to eradicate witchcraft but also abuse it for his own personal (and as seen in the film a way to sate his own personal lusts) gain. It’s this hypocritical nature of who was suppose to be a Puritanical and righteous agent of God which emphasizes the true historical horror of religion and politics becoming one and the same.

Vincent Price as Matthew Hopkins was at the top of his game in Witchfinder General. He gives his role not just an air of superiority over everyone he meets and deals with, but he also makes Hopkins’ truly an amoral character who sees nothing wrong in taking advantage of his position and actually feels like he deserves the desperate attentions of those willing to do anything to save their loved ones from his machinations. Robert Russell as his licentious and sadistic assistant Stearne also does a great job in portraying an individual who might seem brutish and thuggish, but who was also more honest with is situation than his master. It makes for an interesting pair despite their roles being the film’s prime antagonists.

The film more than truly earned the outcry it received upon it’s release in 1968 as scenes of torture and sadism was extreme for a British horror film industry so used to the Gothic sensibilities of the Hammer Films of the era. Graphic depictions of burnings, torture and drowning were done not to seem gratuitious or to cater to the burgeoning gorehound crowd of the era, but done so matter-of-factly that they seem even more horrific.

The Witchfinder General really helped usher in the death of gothic horror which dominated the genre with the Hammer Films in the UK and the Edgar Allan Poe films of Roger Corman in the US. The film continues to impress new generations of horror fans and is still considered by older fans of the genre as one of the best horror films ever made. For some the film might look dated due to the acting (most of the actors of the era were stage actors first and film ones second) and the effects work, but they also fail to look at the film in context of the era and how even by today’s standard it would still shock those not well-versed in the genre of horror. They definitely don’t make horror films like this anymore and that’s a shame on many levels.