A serial killer unleashes his blood lust at a remote environmental-camp. Years later a horror novelist relocates to rural England and is plagued to the point of madness by horrific hauntings of a massacre.

Susan and her husband move to house in the wood in order to help her writing works. After involving in a affair with the gamekeeper nearby, Susan begins to witness strange vision in the house and in the woods, including crime committed in the past and the bloody body. She is now suffered from mental illness and need helps. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Psychosis torrent reviews

Folashade A (kr) wrote: Shantee Smith- I love her, the movie is really funny and interesting. Storyline was O K but predictable.

Robyn (jp) wrote: A wonderful ,beautiful ,surprisingly well directed movie~!

Charlie G (gb) wrote: If you saw the first one you saw this one.

Pavan R (ag) wrote: Very realistic and keeps you engrossed...too simplistically made to feel like a movie......the end...hmm...realistic i guess

Josh H (au) wrote: 1 star because there was a tiger. And Van Damme owned it. Life of Pi prequel

Lee C (es) wrote: "You can't save everyone, even family" is what this for the movie is all about. Trying to get past where you come from to move on with your life is not always easy. "Stuart Saves His Family" deals with his alcoholic father, dysfunctional siblings, and self absorbed mother - all with Stuart in the middle of everything. There is a message underneath all of the Chaos he goes through to help bail his family out of the troubles they constantly run into. Regardless of the reviews the film, It still deserves a watch. and you never know - This could very well be your family in this movie. Funny & Touching. Enjoy!

Shawn W (it) wrote: Series wisely brings back the true American Ninja, Michael Dudikoff, but Steve James is missing now. I did like some parts of this one but I remain confused as to why an army of ninjas would be serving an Arabian Sheik.

Riley H (it) wrote: Everything about this movie is flat and the whole thing is boring.

greg w (ca) wrote: Gerry & Sylvia Anderson break away from their TV kiddie sci-fi roots with this near excellent genre entry. Director Robert Parrish gets solid performances from the cast, the effects are top rate and the mind-bending (albeit, draggy) plot will pull you in right from the start. don't bother comparing it to more modern sci-fi films at all - enjoy this as a post-2001: A Space Odysssey example of a genre maturing a few steps up from the usual.

Benjamin O (jp) wrote: Whimsical soppyness.

Karsh D (us) wrote: Totally awful comedy spoof of the fast and furious films

Ken N (ru) wrote: Reading through the professional reviews of this film, the two adjectives I would pick-out as most apposite in describing this film are anachronistic and absurd. It is funny to recall just how much more naive we were in the 1970s. I suppose, even then, we knew this type of thing wasn?t actually very realistic, but we didn?t necessarily find it quite as absurd as it seems now. Can you imagine what would happen if any genuine police operation tore through the centre of London, discharging fire-arms in all directions through crowds of ordinary people? Major news coverage, questions in parliament, demands for public enquiries, the fallout would rumble on for months, even years. Even when Regan and Carter decide to take on the criminals away from the general public ? any person involved in genuine security operations would cringe in embarrassment at the naivety of the portrayed operation. In the real world, if Regan and Carter had not been slung out of the police force first, the news story would be about two officers who came a serious cropper, killed by their own breathtaking incompetence when they decided to take on a couple of dangerous criminal holed up on a boat without any back-up. Any genuine police operation to apprehend two armed criminals holed up on a boat would involve a significant number of personnel. Okay, if you were to compare this film with your average Bond film, the amount of suspension of disbelief required is relatively small, but at least Bond films don?t pretend to be anything other than ridiculous male fantasy.In truth, the original 1970s television series on which this film is based had a similar tendency to stretch the bounds of credibility, but it did have one thing absent from this film that afforded it some right to the claim of ?gritty realism?. The thing that the original TV series had, that even at the time marked it out as very different from any of the plethora of contemporary TV ?Cop? shows was an underlying mood of melancholy. In John Thaw?s portrayal of Regan in particular was a sense of the heavy price his job exacted upon him, and I?m not talking about physical injury or physical harm to those dear to him. Yes, he was tough and unconventional but effective, but Thaw?s Regan was not a happy soul at peace with himself. The TV series did seek to portray the way in which Regan was troubled by the experiences he lived, maybe even troubled by the methods he found himself using. Yes, a TV series affords more time for such subtleties, but the TV series at least had this one aspect that lent it some feel of ?realism?. This film is devoid of any such sense.

Jenn M (au) wrote: Kinda lame, even my daughter thought it was boring :(