The Haunting of the Tower of London

THE HAUNTING OF THE TOWER OF LONDON is another one of those dead cheap indies you see filling bargain bins and the bottom tier of DVD shelving. How they get released I have no idea, but there's obviously profit to be made because they keep making them no matter the quality. This one is supposedly about the mystery of the princes in the Tower - the ones supposedly murdered by Richard III - but isn't really about anything other than some vengeful spirits, cosplaying stars, and a production that doesn't go within 100 miles of the real location. There's some extended torture sequences later on but hardly worth tuning in for.

Prolific UK filmmaker Charlie Steeds writes, directs and edits this medieval horror chiller based on the infamous legend. As usual, this is a slim-budgeted venture, but Steeds enlivens scenes with some terrific cinematography and lighting and some (mainly) convincing acting. The playful, sometimes coarse, humour prevalent in some of the director's other productions is mainly absent here - instead, gratuity and gore is the main staple.

I really like these kinds of productions, and currently, there are plenty being made in the UK. They remind me of a modern-day Hammer style (the titles here are extremely reminiscent of the legendary studio's output and locations look similarly winter-bound).

It isn't flawless. The pace slackens here and there, some of the performances are not as sharp as they might be and occasionally the dialogue is anachronistic - but the story is a good one and well told. Happily, there are also some effectively creepy moments (and a particularly nasty third act). My score is 7 out of 10.

Seems the director didn't know what tone to stick with, because it goes from Creepy Castle Ghost Story to Torture Porn by the final act. Also some mumbo jumbo about a psychic that's trying to decipher a message from 2 murdered princes...its just not well executed enough to keep the viewer invested. Too bad, because with an awesome (real) castle setting & better filmmakers, this could've been a GREAT horror film, instead it is below average! Best to avoid!

Set during the dying days of England's King Edward IV, this is a speculative version of the events that removed his legitimate heir and his brother and smoothed the process of ensuring that Richard III succeeded to give battle in vain. Now I say speculative because this has largely abandoned the history and supplanted it with the vivid imagination of auteur Charlie Steeds. He can't have had much money or time for anything here, but despite that he manages to film a certain effective eeriness to the scenarios. There is, however, nothing more to be said for this fanciful, slightly kinky, and really quite risible tale of usurpation. The acting is as bad as the writing - and that's saying something. Richard Rowden and Reece Connolly come across little better than easy on the eye drama school students and Tim Cartwright's attempt at portraying the megalomanic Richard III can be guaranteed to remind you of the original "Blackadder" series from forty years earlier. The myths about the princes in the tower are a great seam for film makers. This one? Well it's one that needs to be planted six feet under!

If you like appalling acting etc,then you'll love this!

I am all for people making a movie with little money,but this just doesn't cut it!

Mr Steeds needs to make fewer films and concentrate on putting his finances into something more worthwhile!