This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

The paranormal investigators Jack Donavan (Michael Koltes) and Jonathan Blazer (Paul Flannery) receive a mysterious invitation card to go to the notorious Richmond Manor, where several murders have happened along 200 years. A mysterious butler tells that his boss has invited them to stay for three nights at the mansion to get rid of the label of haunted house. In return, they would receive fifty thousand dollars each. Jack is a skeptical man that uses technology to find frauds while Jonathan is a medium. What will they find in the Richmond Manor?"Ghosts of Darkness" is a flawed low budget haunted house film with many clichés. However with improvements in the storyline and screenplay; a better budget; and replacement of the unconvincing Michael Koltes, this film could work. The result is not good but is not awful at all since Paul Flannery gives some touch of humor to the story. My vote is four.Title (Brazil): Not Available

On a lazy Saturday night, I came across a film that piqued my interest, "Ghosts of Darkness".The premise starts off simple enough, a ghost hunter and a medium are invited to a house to prove that it isn't haunted. Each are offered $50,000.00 USD to spend three days within the house and at the end declare the house is safe from any sort of paranormal activity.The two investigators are at odds almost immediately upon meeting one another. One a staunch skeptic, the other a whimsy medium. As they spend the days (and nights) in the house, it becomes very clear everything isn't as it once appeared to be. You can tell this is a budget b-horror film from the get go, but that isn't always a bad thing. The cinematography is of average quality, the special effects aren't terrible and the two actors are actually really good.This film has a lot of comedy in it and when I first started watching it, it almost had a "Beetlejuice" vibe to it.Further (and this is my favorite part), the writers took time to explain almost every aspect of the film, from character's back stories, to the house's history, why it was haunted and wrapped it all up in a decent little package.I'll be blunt, this will NOT be the best horror/comedy you'll ever see. But it won't be the worst either. It's worth giving it a go if you need to get your horror fix on.

That being said, I did not find it entirely unlikable. The premise was interesting at first but once some things were revealed, it didn't really go anywhere with the info or finish the story along those lines. I wanted them to go more in-depth with the reveal. Instead, it just became a silly try-to-scare-ya movie, which fell flat.While Michael Koltes performance as Jack the paranormal investigator was lackluster and stoic, Paul Flannery as Jonathan the psychic steals every scene he's in with his Cumberbatch acting (reminiscent of Dr. Strange)/Sirius Black look. I finished watching it just for his performance alone, wanting to see what he would do next. It definitely kept me from falling asleep. If your a Cumberbitch, you'll enjoy his performance because his delivery is VERY similar. Its the main reason I rated it as high as I did.

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.