Lord of Misrule

All the pieces are in place here for a decent folk horror, but Lord of Misrule never really takes off. Tuppence Middleton does an okay job but I could never believe in her as a vicar. She, her husband, and their child are just a 'meh' sort of family. And all the pagan elements are things we've seen a dozen times already. A trio of people standing in the mid-distance wearing animal heads. A rambunctious festival hiding something more sinister. Corn doilies and whatnot hanging from trees. And then, of course, a missing girl, and sacrifices, and so on, and so on.

It's not bad, exactly. But none of the characters behave in particularly believable ways, which means that it's hard to get invested in them. This, combined with its lack of originality, makes it all a bit of a slog.

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.

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.

Firstly, this 5.x rating is nonsense... Normally I try to be very even handed with reviews and not get too worked up, but in this case we honestly have a very, very good film that is extremely well made, well acted, and with a fantastic Folk Horror atmosphere, in my lowly and wretched opinion the best I've seen since the original 'WICKER MAN'

The reason why I feel so strongly about this movie is because it seems that we so rarely see such a well thought out, deeply intriguing Pagan/Folk Thriller without a bunch of heavy handed, over the top cruelty or violence. In this case, we have a very well crafted film that has TONS of genuine and creepy atmosphere which strongly lends itself to some good suspense and Mystery.

Yes, the story is a bit on the slower side than what is considered 'Horror' these days, almost a throwback to when these kinds of movies relied more on building a good, effective atmosphere with continuously tightening up the tension until a powerful ending. And, what I personally like about the ending, without of course spoiling anything, is that we have something that I feel is refreshing and unlike the usual cliched 'Sting' at the end, but still with a pretty strong surprise.

It is too bad that a lot of people come here and gave this excellent and well made film such low scores, simply because THEY just don't care for slower, more atmospheric, Folk Horror stories. It's like I've said many times before in my reviews... I personally hate sadistic movies that feature Torture Porn. But, it would be unfair for me to come here and rate all the movies like that poorly just because I personally do not like them. That would not help others who happen to like those kinds of movies in any way to know whether it is a 'Good' film or not, would it.

So, I refrain from doing that although I very much do not like those kinds of movies. It would be very nice if others would show the same respect for the types of films that they simply don't care for or find 'Boring' as many say here, and not deliberately lower the score for those of us who DO indeed really like this type of Horror. Thus my rare but I feel definitely earned '8' rating that I gave it.

If you don't like, slower, more atmospheric Folk Horror films, then please just give this one a pass and kindly don't ruin the score for those who do like them. BUT... if you do like these kinds of Folk Horror stories like the Iconic 'WICKER MAN' (original of course) then you should really enjoy this excellent, well made, and I feel quite effective Horror story.

It's not a perfect film, but it does a lot right and is worth your time if you like this type of thing.

In line with what I expected from the director - the story is going to be a rehash and not perfect, but certainly nothing offensively bad.

Casting, Directing, general pace is all fine... I notice a few other reviews complaining about the pace - absolutely nothing wrong with it, it's building tension and the general meh of rural life.

The writing, as others have pointed out, is a bit... well traditional Folk Horror... but where is there to go with it? If you've read a few Folk Horror books you'll notice the same things coming up: Harvests and sacrifices - often unwilling. So... complaining that a Folk Horror contains all the required Folk Horror tropes seems a bit odd to me (which seems to be the running trend here).

It leans heavily into Christianity vs The Old Ways, and treats Christianity with a rare respect - the Vicar is not a overtly double standard kiddie fiddler for once, they're a sympathetic character that you can get behind. Some clever steps here: make it CoE and make the Vicar female. Allows an awful lot of legwork to be done in your head.

Does it want to be The Wicker Man, well obviously.

Is it The Wicker Man, well... course not - but what is? You can't compare a Michellin Movie with a midrange offering - you'd be a fool.

The casting is superb, not only Middleton and Ineson, but the supporting cast as well - they carry the middling story a very long way.