Lord of Misrule

We have a vicar who rarely acts very religious (except in church) and drops F-bombs casually on multiple occasions. Her spouse seems like a bitter atheist and will not pray with her. I mean, they seem more like an average mismatched couple - one theistic, one not - than AN ACTUAL VICAR OF A CHURCH and her husband.

People get angry and then calm down within seconds. They don't have much respect for the vicar and treat her more like a random crazy woman than anything else. The children even start chanting in a vulgar way, gleefully, without a hint of fear or embarrassment at acting that way in front a church pastor.

I feel like Lord of Misrule is a patchwork attempt to mimic other, older horror movies. Like mixing 1970s The Wicker Man with 2000s Silent Hill and a random urinating scene like the original version of The Exorcist.

Lord of Misrule does have atmosphere and lovely folk horror aesthetics yet the writing and character development are significantly wanting.

Starts off with some promise but quickly outstays it's welcome. Ralph Ineson does a good job of playing brooding local Jocelyn Abney but the plot regarding the disappearance of a vicars daughter at a harvest festival thingy has nowhere particularly exciting to go.

Folk horror with its strange pagan symbols and odd country folk with their odd country ways, it's not actually that scary is it?, not in this movie anyway. And it starts to grate after a time.

It reminded me somewhat of a better and rather underrated movie called The Witches from 1966.

Word around the village is the daughter has been abducted by a harvest spirit called Gallawgog.

The mother of the child is played by Tuppence Middleton and she looks suitably anguished throughout and does a good job I thought.

To be honest this was a hard slog and i started to not particularly care what the outcome was. Young Evie Templeton puts in a good turn as the missing daughter, and maybe if your in to Folk Horror more than me you will enjoy it more.

I found it rather washed out and worse , unintentionally funny at times.

I recently watched the Irish/UK 🇮🇪 🇬🇧 film Lord of Misrule (2023) on Hulu. The storyline follows a minister and his daughter as they move to a seemingly welcoming village. It appears to be the perfect home for their small family-until the daughter goes missing. As the search unfolds, it becomes clear the village may have darker intentions.

Directed by William Brent Bell (Orphan: First Kill), the film stars Tuppence Middleton (Possessor), Ralph Ineson (The Witch), and Robert Goodman (Gangs of New York).

This was an uneven film with some interesting elements. The concept had potential, evoking vibes of The Ritual and Hereditary at times. The festival backdrop and costumes were visually engaging, and the film maintained a mysterious atmosphere throughout. However, the storytelling dragged in places, making it easy to lose interest. The acting felt authentic, and there was an unexpectedly great "peeing" scene. The creature design was well done, and the ending twist was solid.

In conclusion, Lord of Misrule has enough intriguing elements to keep your attention but struggles with pacing. I'd score it a 5.5/10.

If you ever seen a horror movie, the chances are you know from the start where all this is going. And there will be no surprises.

So the main problem of this movie is the plot, its based on classic folklore stories and follows the path that so many movies (or even child stories) have shown before. Which might be good... but it does not exceed any expectation.

So some might call it a classic, some might call it a cliche. Either way, its not unique, its not new, even the creature - I saw it in dozen other movies, and I can name multiple where its simply executed better ("The Ritual", for example).

In other terms, it is mediocre. Characters are not very likable or believable. The motivation of the antagonist (for example) and his image - I believe they are severly lacking any originality or style, they are so superficial it hurts.

Ending is simply weak - culmination is unsatisfying. It is simple (which is good sometimes), but it ain't smart or fulfilling, or entertaining in this case.

So I'd say the score I've given in generous. It's a mediocre movie. Some might say its okay, some might say its bad, but there is no basis to call it great - that is for sure.

I see multiple ways this could've been a better movie (just add a single thing that isn't a trope), but it is obvious that nobody bothered here to create something new or unique, this is just same old same old once again.

Tuppence Middleton Ralph Innes.

This film joins a raft of folklore horror films over the years. To be fair though it was pretty well put together and I liked the pace. You don't always have to have action, beautiful actors, gratuitous violence and cgi..this is just an honest and decent sinister film. Special mentions to Tuppence Middleton who I thought was outstanding and very plausible as the vicar. Ralph Innes played his part very well too. People giving this 9 or 10 of 10 are way off the mark, as are those clowns giving it 1s and 2s. It's a decent effort in a saturated market, and while I likely wouldn't watch it a second time I did enjoy it.