All through October, I’ll be posting reviews of the best of the best films in the horror genre released since October 1, 2025, through September 30, 2026. As an added bonus, I’ll be doing a secondary review that may be somewhat related to the main review or slightly missed the countdown by inches. Follow along the countdown every day in October. Feel free to agree, disagree, or better yet, give me your own picks for your favorite horror movies of the year. Happy Halloween!

The Best in Horror 2025-2026 So Far…

#31 – DOLLY (GATOR FACE)
#30 – THINESTRA (SACCHARINE)
#29 – ONSLAUGHT (BEAST OF WAR)
#28 – READY OR NOT 2: HERE I COME (PENNY LANE IS DEAD)
#27 – IN OUR BLOOD (V/H/S/HALLOWEEN)
#26 – SEND HELP (HEEL)
#25 – THE CARPENTER’S SON (THE BOOK OF SIJJIN AND ILLIYYIN)
#24 – OTHER (YOU ARE NOT ME)
#23 – WHO’S WATCHING (MATCH)
#22 – HOPE (TOUCH ME)
#21 – THEY WILL KILL YOU (MEAT KILLS)
#20 – IT ENDS (ANACORETA)
#19 – TEENAGE SEX AND DEATH AT CAMP MIASMA (PLAY DEAD)
#18 – IRON LUNG (THE DEEP DARK)
#17 – LEE CRONIN’S THE MUMMY (SILENT NIGHT, DEADLY NIGHT)
#16 – BUFFET INFINITY (KETCHUP ON WAFFLES)
#15 – DUST BUNNY (THE YETI)
#14 – BUDDY (MONKEY’S MAGIC MERRY GO ROUND)
#13 – INFLUENCERS (PRIMAL DARKNESS)
#12 – KEEPER (THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN)

#12 – KEEPER (2025)

Released on November 14, 2025!
Streaming on Hulu from NEON!
Directed by Osgood Perkins.
Written by Nick Lepard.
Check out the trailer here!

Liz (Tatiana Maslany) has been dating Malcolm (Rossif Sutherland) for about a year and though she still has some suspicions that her doctor boyfriend is keeping secrets, she decides it’s time to go on a weekend vacation with him to his cabin in the woods. Turns out, Malcolm does have a secret, and Liz is about to find out what it is and it ain’t good. It ain’t good tat-tall.

By now, you probably know if you’re a fan of Oz Perkins’ films. He’s done six so far and all of them have been films not unlike the work of David Lynch, as there are some that are just going to dive into the strange world he creates and some who will just not get it and want to exit the theater post haste. I’m of the former. I’ve liked pretty much all of Perkins’ work, though some more than others. So, if you’re the type who don’t mind ambiguous, ethereal stories of the macabre, and prefer the more in-your-face horrors of, say, FIVE NIGHTS AT FREDDIES, then you’re not going to like KEEPER either because it is much of the same.

And the same means that KEEPER is moody and surreal as all get out. It’s dark and dangerous pretty much from the get-go and while there is a dark comedic tone throughout (mostly from Tatiana Maslany, more on that later), for the most part, this is a pitch-black film about the dangers of trust, the disintegration of romance, and the traditional abuse of women throughout time. Pretty hefty themes, but Perkins makes an entertaining film about it all.

The audience knows this is a horror movie, so we know what to expect as Malcolm takes Liz to this secluded cabin in the snowy woods. Unfortunately, Liz doesn’t. She believes this is a move from casual dating to something more serious with Malcolm, who is a busy and well to do doctor. So, a vacation in the woods is something a middle-aged gal like Liz would hope for. It’s not that Liz is naive. It’s just that despite her friend warning her of the red flags, Liz is hopeful. So, there’s this pervasive terror in the air pretty much the entire time, even during the more intimate and relaxing bits, as you’re just waiting for the axe to drop. It’s that type of bleak cloud that hovers over most Perkins’ films. If you know, you know.

Perkins’ settings do a lot of the heavy lifting here in terms of mood. The house is full of odd angles and though we are taken through it, there really isn’t a normal room in the entire place. Perkins does a lot with warped perspectives and the use of fore, middle, and background, forcing you to keep an eye on all three so as not to miss anything dangerous or important to the plot. You never really see the horror lurking in the background until the climax, but throughout Perkins makes these creatures uncanny, with shapes that are vaguely recognizable, but not. The cold outside is also used well as it seems to be yet another factor trapping Liz in this prison of a home. Much time is spent focusing on the cold brook just outside the window, but it might as well be a million miles away by the way Liz gazes out at it.

No doubt, it’s Maslany who makes this film work. While I’m not a fan of her SHE-HULK work, and never got into ORPHAN BLACK, here it is evident why she has become such a respected actor. Without her providing some truly human moments, this would be a cold and alien film. There’s a grounded and sometimes weird way Liz has about her that makes her instantly relatable. The reason why a lot of the film works is through her quirky mannerisms while doing everyday things like taking a bath or simply taking a nap. The fact that she can hold my interest during these quiet moments proves her power as a star. She is put through the wringer by the end but remains poised and likable the whole time. There’s a scene where she finds out just what Malcolm is up to and she tries to rationalize it in her head that is human and authentic. She’s magnificent in this film.

Sutherland’s Malcolm is a tough cookie to read for both Liz and the audience. There is just something pod-personish about him all the way through. There are times when it seems some humanity creeps in and we see why Liz might be interested in him (I mean, despite the fact that he’s a rich doctor with a luxurious cabin in the woods), but for the most part, he has this cold, robotic stare, as if he knows something, yet somehow regrets what is about to happen.

And what happens is some twisted ass shit, I’ll tell you what. Once the curtain is pulled back and we realize just what is going on—well, that’s not all-together true, once we get a clue as to what danger Liz is in, the terror is palpable. From the bizarre shapes of the creatures to their horrifying cries of pain and agony, these monsters are unlike any seen in cinema before. The film has to do with a legacy of torment and sacrifice, and these monsters exemplify these aspects to a tee. The final harrowing scene where Maslany faces these creatures is the stuff of pure nightmare.

By the time the credits rolled, I found myself once again impressed at the creativity and originality of Perkins’ KEEPER. Bits and pieces of the film have been done before and it still seems to embody Perkins’ sense of surreality and oddity, but this one felt a little more personal and soulful, mostly due to Maslany’s fantastic performance. Yes, as with many of Perkins’ films, there is a lengthy monolog during the climax, explaining it all to the cheap seats—something I feel would be better left unsaid, but also something I can imagine the studios pushed Perkins to do to make this film a skosh more mainstream. Still, there are few voices like Oz Perkins out there making films and once again, he didn’t disappoint with KEEPER.

Worth Noting – THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN (2025)

Released on February 13, 2026!
Streaming on Shudder from Chroma!
Directed/Written by Harry Aspinwall.
Check out the trailer here!

A man posing as a real estate agent (Clive Russell) brings random people to an empty house to feed it souls. When a young runaway (Bobby Rainsbury) breaks into the home for a place to squat for a bit, she forms a connection with the house. But what happens once the house becomes hungry again?

Taking place within one house and captured on stationary cameras, THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN is a meditative sort of film, where the terror comes in subtle, but powerful waves. This is one of those films that’s not going to work for many horror fans who prefer more wham-bang action, gory special effects, and a frantic pace. It’s more akin with films like Osgood Perkins’ I AM THE PRETTY THING THAT LIVES IN THE HOUSE or Steven Sodoberg’s PRESENCE, where something supernatural is going on, but it is more…realistic? If that makes sense? Whether I am or am not a believer in ghosts aside, I don’t think hauntings are like what transpires in THE CONJURING movies with thunderous noise and shit flying everywhere. Personally, if I consider hauntings to be real, they are going to show up in more subtle forms—otherwise they would be seen more often. I guess that’s the way I see it, though I do love a good loud and violent haunting on screen now and then. So, seeing the little things occur in these static shots of rooms as the movie goes on makes it all feel a little more authentic, a little more close to home, and a little more personal. And that’s what this film is. It’s more of a quiet and personal take on a haunted house film.

I loved THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN on a technical level in terms of camerawork and how it reveals a story simply through action or inaction and conversations that one feels like they are eavesdropping on. We are made privy to what’s happening through some phone calls between the girl and someone on the phone and then some interactions between the realtor and those interested in buying the house, but for the most part, the way the static camera captures action going on in a few specific rooms of the house is what this film offers up in terms of telling its story. The house and the relator have a special bond—an agreement between them that he will provide people for it to consume and it provides him with…well, I won’t say, but they share an extremely interesting relationship between one another, not unlike the relationship between the little vampire and her keeper in both LET THE RIGHT ONE IN and LET ME IN. Still, the house has no dialog. It’s through these subtle actions that you begin to understand the complexity of the relationship it shares with the relator and the runaway girl.

Experimental and arthousey? Yes, yes, it is. The performances are distant as there are no closeups or POV shots. Just a camera standing some distance away in the middle of the room capturing what’s going on around it. Characters come in and out of frame without the camera moving at all, so one only gets pieces to the puzzle and unlike 80% of the movies out there, you must put it all together yourself.

There is a huge beating heart to this film. It requires a little magic thinking, sort of the same magic that makes you want to believe in the TOY STORY concept where the toys you play with have lives of their own once you put them down and go away. Does that concept go for houses? What does it feel like when a loving growing family is inside? And what does it feel like when it is empty and alone? Having just sold the house I grew up in, I found myself wandering through the empty house the last few days I was there, saying goodbye in my own way, taking all of this into consideration. It’s silly from some angle, but still, even if there is a sliver of some kind of soul in a home, one would wish the best for it after moving on. These are the types of thoughts that are evoked from THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN. Given the slow pace, it does give one the time to let the mind wander, that’s for sure.

This is a little film. One you most likely haven’t heard about. But if you like meaningful horror in increments that really do hit deep once all the cards are on the table, sit with THE HOUSE WAS NOT HUNGRY THEN. It’s challenging and takes a long time of sitting and watching a single POV, but if you’re patient, the climax is explosive and as tense as can be.

Once again, feel free to agree, disagree, or how about you play along at home and give me your own picks for your favorite horror movies. It’s October, so let’s talk horror. Come back tomorrow for the next level in the Best in Horror Countdown. Be sure to hit all of the pertinent bells and whistles down below and you’ll never miss a post! Happy Halloween, folks!