WasAnnon Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Cooktopi The acting in this movie is really good.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

maarck6 Saw this movie the first time in the early eighties when I saw it on the all-blackly owned channel 62 in Detroit. A channel that would show huge blocks of movies of all kinds; spirituals, westerns, sleazy horror, mysteries, black and white or color. It just didn't matter. Unfortunately, because of the generic title, this movie was lost for years. I saw it once on VHS then not again for thirty years, then not again until five years late, and now I get to see it again in an excellent print. What can I say about this supernatural slasher? British exploitation at its best with amputation, beheadings, impaling, poltergeistic activity, hypnotism, bloody murder, stabbings, garrotings, full frontal nudity, a s&m stripper, immolation by fire, beautiful English babes, a trans-generational curse, a levitating car, a plot with as much logic as anything by Dario Argente, stiff and bad acting, and Tricia Walsh as a ginger haired ditz who manages to steal every scene she's in. Ghod, what more can you want? Should be taught in film schools. Eight stars because I've never been less than entertained by this movie. A good double feature with Superstition.

Leofwine_draca Terrible or Terrifying? This low budget thriller is brought to us from small-time exploitation king Norman J. Warren, the man responsible for such extreme British classics as SATAN'S SLAVE and INSEMINOID. What little plot the film contains is soon ditched as it becomes just another string of gory murders, but on the plus side the film does manage to evoke some scenes of fear and fright.It's strange how much low budget work (take The Texas Chain Saw Massacre for example) manages to be a lot more terrifying than big budget blockbusters, such as recent debacle of THE HAUNTING. Perhaps it's the increased realism of this budgetary-challenged films, which lack the glossiness and shininess of the latest Hollywood release, factors which distance those films from the viewers. TERROR is a hard, depressingly realistic film, where events are played out among sleazy pornography films and characters shout and swear at each other just for the sake of it.The film begins promisingly with a mini-movie, which, like the beginning of Hammer's VAMPIRE CIRCUS, is quite simply brilliant. It shows a witch burning and then returning from the grave to gorily dispatch members of a family. After this a bloody murder ensues, and the film becomes part murder-mystery, but it soon becomes clear that supernatural forces are at work and we are left to sit back and watch the relentless bloodshed. The unknown cast (see if you can spot Sarah Keller from THE BEYOND) all perform well.Most of the murders are imaginative, well-staged and definitely not for the squeamish. One man has a camera crush his head, a woman is stabbed many times and impaled against a tree. A man has his neck slit with broken glass (this film obviously inspired the makers of GHOST) while another girl is bloodily dispatched on a stairway. There is no happy ending here, no release from the deaths. Just murder and mayhem. And yes, the film is scary in places, conjuring the fear of the power of the unknown in much the same way as THE EXORCIST did, using the blood to sicken and repulse the viewer and make him/her beg for release from the horror. On these counts, TERROR is a minor success for the director, little seen and even less heard about, but succeeding well in disturbing the viewer.

Michael O'Keefe Low budget horror from Crown International filmed in Surrey, England. A young British heir James Garrick(John Nolan)presents to a gathering of friends a movie he produced about his family that over a hundred years earlier were cursed by a witch named Mad Molly. The witch's prophecy as she was burned at the stake continues as Garrick's friends, who curiously watched the movie, soon begin losing their lives and limbs by various horrible methods. It becomes very apparent the power of supernatural forces is not to be taken lightly. TERROR is filled with gore and bits of nudity. Not exactly memorable, but fun to watch. The cast also features Carolyn Courage, James Aubrey, Michael Craze, Tricia Walsh and Sarah Keller.

Vomitron_G Norman J. Warren is a director I only discovered in recent years. After having seen his "Satan's Slave", I was so enthusiastic (can't even fully explain why exactly), that I went on a quest to see the man's other efforts. That's when I discovered I had already seen "Inseminoid" about 5 years earlier (and liked it). I even re-watched that one, to bring things into perspective with his other horror films. And now, I can safely say I'm a fan of the man. Sure, all of his films are imperfect in more than one way. At more than one point, they'll always get a little goofy. But the man never fails to entertain me. And in his own, unique & British low-budget way, he always delivers. One thing I like a lot about his movies, is that his special effects are (almost) always on-set practical realizations. And not only he tries a lot of them, he also tries to push them to the max with the limited means he has. In "Terror", for example, he levitates a whole frickin' car to the level of tree-tops, and then lets it crash into the ground. Never mind that you know how it's done. It's just too much fun to see it happen. And the same goes for the various make-up effects. They're not on par with what, let's say, Tom Savini was doing at the time, but they're always gross & fun. And you can always count on a bit of random nudity in his flicks. As for his stories... well, they rattle and shake altogether, often not making too much sense, but damned be me if I ever was not entertained by any of them. In short: I think Norman J. Warren is a long forgotten director any true horror geek should check out at one point, sooner or later. "Terror" pretty much is a witch movie with slasher overtones, and an entertaining one while at it. Just for fun, I'll give a rundown of the films I watched already from his filmography and slap 'em with a rating:"Satan's Slave" (1976) - 7/10"Inseminoid" (1981) - 6/10"Terror" (1978) - 6/10"Prey" (1978) 5/10"Bloody New Year" (1987) - 4/10 (even a flunked Norman J. Warren movie doesn't mean it wasn't a fun watch)