Konterr Brilliant and touching

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

chaos-rampant This is delightful in a small way but you have to make a shift. It gives out that it's going to be horror about poltergeists, we get to that effect malicious forces around the house, objects that move, a possessed girl and a seance, in other words we have largely the same events and scenes of a poltergeist film but without the murky oppression of American films of that sort, without the angst or the aural violence.We get instead a whole other narrative ground beneath our feet, foreboding of another kind - the house as a house of grief, a girl whose father abandoned them "possessed" by a monstrous father, smashing things and hurling abuse. A bereaved father who comes to investigate and finds a surrogate daughter much like the one he lost one day - and named the same no less. All this is made obvious in the course of things.What I like is that from this ground up we have what the British do so well, an embracing of people and relationships between them that comes with a natural affinity. The Brits are not particularly interesting in a visual way - they're either bland or tend to control too much - but the trade-off in fact is that they delight in faces and spoken words, in the peoplesness of people; the same energy that in the more rowdy Italians tends to waft around the environment, in the case of Brits it's kept firmly inside persons. They are good souls in my mind.If you look here - all its real charm comes from the adventurousness of human friction, from how characters rub and glide off each other. Lovely actors. The two girls, Janet in particular, one of the most endearing I've seen, an absolute firecracker of sassy spirit.

Spikeopath The Enfield Poltergeist was, to many of us growing up in 1970s Britain, a terrifying story. Between 1977 and 1979, a council house in Enfield, England, was supposedly the home to a poltergeist, the definition of which is noisy ghost. The main focus of the poltergeist activity was towards young Janet Hodgson, giving some credence to the experts belief that poltergeists hone in on pre-pubescent teenagers. The events at the house caused a media storm, enticing specialists, believers and sceptics to visit and fuel a fire that still simmers away today.Interestingly the title of this British production has it right, in that calling it a haunting at least doesn't lie to the viewers. As with Tobe Hooper's 1982 film, Poltergeist, the presence of a poltergeist spirit is pretty much a side-bar to another story, where Hooper's film went off to another dimension, Kristoffer Nyholm & Joshua St Johnston's film here dials into grief and absent parents, then choosing to grab demonic possession and mediums for its big shocks.Many liberties have been taken with the facts, with added outside interests brought in to flesh a story out. Though the core essence of the story, the suspicions of truth etc, remain. The Enfield Haunting is a grand and unsettling production, undeniably scary for those that buy into the possibility of a haunting of this type being real. The performances are led by quality thespians, Timothy Spall and Juliet Stevenson, both of whom play grief and distress with a shattering conviction, and young Eleanor Worthington Cox as Janet is a bundle of exciting promise. Period detail is first class, though the house used here is some way away from the actual house of the events, while the opening credits are superb, even if they only tantalise as regards the alleged events in the girls' bedroom and disappointingly don't form part of this story.If this pic has longevity of interest in its own land, or even being capable of garnering interest away from the shores of the UK? Is tricky to say at this point. Because ultimately it plays out with familiar horror conventions, like it's cashing in on the recent cravings for Conjuring and Insidious kinks. Ironically, the team behind The Conjuring have reconvened to make a sequel - about The Enfield Poltergeist. Now I wonder if that one will actually be about a poltergeist... 8/10

xsophietaylorx I saw the adverts for the Enfield haunting and was so excited and I have not been disappointed I think the Enfield Haunting is a great believable representation of the events that actually occurred. It's scary but it's not with the usual stupid scares it's eerie it makes you think about it after you've watched it really does imprint on your opinion of the paranormal. Timothy Spall's acting as usual is brilliant and so very believable. I also think the little girl who plays Janet will go very far her she is also very talented in acting by her portrayal in the Enfield Haunting. The Enfield haunting is just great really, great actors, great representation great everything! It's so fascinating that the events actually happened it's made me want to read more into the events of the Enfield Haunting. The only negative I will have to mention is that Sky Living most definitely take the shine of it with the amount of adverts they ram Into the programme you get to see around 5 minutes of the programme and then an advert. Seeing as there's only three episodes you think they would have the Curtisy not to do this. the Enfield haunting probably could have managed to be a short film rather then the three episodes. However it is most definitely worth the watch.

Aaron River Firstly I would like to point out that even though in the 3 part mini series, as well as a lot of the case files and in Guy Lyons playfairs book they refer to it as the "Poltergeist" any one who knows anything about the paranormal or watches any of the numerous (some great, some good, some just bad and some awful)paranormal programs on TV, or the web.. that a Poltergeist is not an earth bound spirit but in fact manifested Psychic energy from a living person! So even though they refer to the disturbances in the house as a "Poltergeist" we all know it's more likely/accurately a Ghost/Demon (depending on your religious beliefs)That said I think that the series it's self is pretty good. I found the young girl playing 11 year old Janet to be both believable and funny at times, she seems to pull of the cheeky/inquisitiveness of an 11 year old kid from North/East London around the 70's.. and I have to say it's a refreshing change to hear a kid from London (especially a young girl) to be talking like a real Londoner, a true cockney! Rather than todays youth who all sound like Catherine Tates character "Lauren Alesha Masheka Tanesha Felicia Jane Cooper" from "The Catherine Tate Show" ""Init m8 na wat i meen like!"" OK I think over all they've done a great job placing the characters, especially Maurice Grosse played by Timothy Spall (another great British actor) he has the same simple uncomplicated look as Maurice Gross, anyone who's watched any of the real tapes recorded at the house between 77-79 will agree! I have to admit I'm having trouble warming up to Guy Playfair, played by Matthew Macfadyen but I think that has a lot more to do with the fact I can only see him in Ripper Street every time I look at him lately (another great TV series) and nothing to do with his acting ability!Any way I'm not going to go in to what the series actually entails or anything else about the production side because you can (and should) watch it your selves for that.. but all in all it's a good if not great factual/dramatised paranormal mini series based in our very own country, in our very own capital.. & with a great cast, some good scares and if you don't want to watch it for any of those reasons then anyone over 35 should get a huge kick out of all the memories that come flooding back from watching one of the most accurate representations of a poverty stricken family living in a council house in London or surrounding counties in 1970's England.. who wont remember the slugs, earwigs, and wood lice crawling along the skirting boards and in the bed at night!!?