Powerful

i must have seen a different film!!

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

It's just what I did. This movie is a total waste of your time on earth. It is so slow that you can literally FF for quite a few seconds in a one on one dramatic vocal exchange before the dialogue starts again....Don't bother...it's awful!

Got this in a pound shop. 99p over priced. No relation to the true Borley Rectory story at all. No supernatural goings on worth reporting. OK, the actors weren't bad, but I felt embarrassed for them . Hope Suzie gets better exposure though, she's good . So slow, and not 1930's at all.

This movie says it's based on the Foyster's experience at the Borley Rectory. It could also be said that "Soylent Green" is based on Ray Kroc's experience flipping burgers. That's about as far as "A Haunting at the Rectory" gets to telling the story about a haunting at the Borley Rectory. Having spoken to Marianne Foyster's son Vince, and having read Harry Price's book about the Rectory, and the Foysters, you come to realize "A Haunting at the Rectory" is a generic story glued on to the Rectory's history, and at least two real people involved in it. Had they at least provided something scary, I could give this movie a higher rating. But their theft of what really is a scary story, and turning it into a dull, melodramatic ride through a pastor's wife's discontent, a sleazy handyman's ruse, and a kind pastor's growing jealousy, oh- and some wandering "ghosts" thrown in because, you know, "Rectory" and all that, makes me realize they stole the Rectory's reputation just to sell the movie. This script could have happened anywhere, but I guess calling it "A Haunting at the 3rd Street Episcopal Church and Community Center," though just as applicable, would have been hard to fit on the DVD box spine.Too bad. I was hoping to experience the Borley Rectory's haunting. Instead, I got a barely recognizable one.

I thought this movie was supposed to be about a haunted place, but it is, in fact, about infidelity. The story focuses on the Reverend's wife and the handyman's affair almost exclusively; so much that the supposed "paranormal" events look totally out of place.This movie did not get anything right. It didn't look or feel like 1930 at all (I've seen documentaries about the 30s). The actors seemed wrong for their respective roles. The events were unrealistic and the characters' response to them illogical. The movie didn't seem to know where it wants to go or what it wants to do with itself.The paranormal events were so few, so exaggerated, discorded and random that it'd make you think that, perhaps, they were edited into this movie from another movie by mistake.The description: "A Reverend and his wife discover their new home has a deadly secret." O.K., what "deadly secret"? Unless I missed something, this "secret" was never revealed...I really don't understand the paranormal connection at all. This movies is about a cheating wife, not about paranormal activity. I didn't get what the ghost drivel, that was randomly shoved into a movie of entirely different genre, had to do with anything or what connection it was supposed to have to the story.Basically, the whole thing is poorly pieced together and a bit messy. Perhaps it would appeal to "drama"- or even "crime"-lovers, but to label it as "mystery" is highly misleading to say the least.