Without Name (2016) Review – A Visually Arresting but Narratively Muddled Trip
Without Name: Quick Verdict
The Verdict: A masterfully shot and visually hypnotic entry into the “elevated” horror sub-genre that successfully weaponises the Irish landscape to create a sense of ancient, claustrophobic dread. Without Name (2016) succeeds as a technical showcase, with Piers McGrail’s stunning cinematography transforming a simple woodland survey into a psychedelic descent into madness. Lorcan Finnegan’s direction is patient and atmospheric, though it occasionally prioritises abstract “art-project” visuals over a cohesive narrative structure. Alan McKenna delivers a commanding lead performance, anchoring the film’s increasingly bizarre hallucinogenic sequences in a palpable sense of marital and psychological decay. While the script’s reliance on ambiguity and subjective interpretation may frustrate viewers seeking a traditional horror payoff, its commitment to a unique, mushroom-addled aesthetic is admirable. This 2.8 star effort is an intelligent, technical curiosity that whispers at greatness but ultimately feels a little light on substance. It is a quiet, yet explosive, study of nature’s indifference to human ownership. It is essential for fans of visual-first folk horror.
Details: Director: Lorcan Finnegan | Cast: Alan McKenna, Niamh Algar, James Browne | Runtime: 1h 33m | Release Date: 2016
Best for: Fans of slow-burn psychological horror, folk-horror enthusiasts, and those who appreciate exceptional cinematography over traditional scares.
Worth noting: The film makes extensive use of strobe lighting and rapid visual pulses, making it a genuine concern for viewers with photosensitive epilepsy.
Where to Watch: VOD, Amazon🛒
Rating: 2.8/5 Stars
(A masterfully directed and visually striking Irish horror that successfully captures a thick atmosphere of woodland dread, despite being frequently weighed down by a convoluted narrative and a lack of clear identity.)
Welcome to Knockout Horror. We are off to Ireland today as we are taking a look at Lorcan Finnegan’s psychological horror movie – Without Name.
Highlights
A “trip” to the woods
Without Name follows a land surveyor (Eric) as he is tasked with surveying an ancient forest. Eric is in the midst of a seemingly troubled marriage but that’s about to be the least of his concerns… After a short while in the forest, it becomes apparent that there is something unusual about the area. Seeking further information, Eric takes a trip into the local village and meets a traveller, Gus, in the pub. Gus tells him of something horrifying living in the village. Though sceptical at first, Eric is about to become more convinced as his life takes a turn for the bizarre and unsettling.
“This is a tough movie to describe. It’s not really horror, it’s more of a psychological trip into the hallucinogenic and bizarre than anything else. The woods are intimidating.”
This is a tough movie to describe. It’s not really horror, it’s more of a psychological trip into the hallucinogenic and bizarre than anything else. The woods are intimidating and the harrowing history of the place hints at some seriously scary themes. They never really materialise, though.
Instead, this is a film that is content to play out as something of a writer’s mushroom addled, naked, psychedelic trip in the forest that he doesn’t quite remember but was apparently life changing.
It’s absolutely gorgeous to look at!
The first thing I feel compelled to talk about is just how good Without Name looks. This is a truly beautiful film. Absolutely stunning cinematography is married perfectly with an impressive locale. Piers McGrail did fantastic work on The Canal but Without Name is leaps and bounds better. I am hugely impressed by just how much he has come along since then. What a fantastic talent!
The location is excellent. The trees in the forest are tightly packed and incredibly imposing. There is a feeling of intense claustrophobia whenever we are in the middle of gan ainm. The lighting transitions only heighten the feeling of discomfort.
“Absolutely stunning cinematography is married perfectly with an impressive locale. Piers McGrail did fantastic work. It’s just a gorgeous movie to look at.”
A muted colour palette adds to the bleak feel and fits well with the theme. There is something inherently terrifying about the woods. This is perfectly captured on film in Without Name. It’s just a gorgeous movie to look at. Even indoor scenes are afforded significant attention to detail.
I should point out that people should take that strobe light warning seriously. This movie has ridiculous levels of flashing lights and they will present a danger to certain people. As far as story goes, this is a movie that fundamentally lacks structure.
Without identity
Lack of identity is part of Without Name‘s problem. The film mixes themes of nature and the illusion of property ownership with themes of mental illness, the supernatural, mythology, and drug use. All in the hope that it somehow gels together. Unfortunately, the gel that Without Name relies on is subjective interpretation rather than actual substance and compelling storytelling. The narrative often feels convoluted and somewhat bloated. This can lead the viewer to have to come up with their own ideas. This, in itself, is fine but Without Name depends on the viewer to tie up its loose ends.
It’s difficult to criticise movies like Without Name. It is far too easy for people who disagree with your opinion to accuse you of “not getting it” or suggest that the film was “too intellectual” for you. I actually adore slow burning horror movies. Despite this, I feel it is necessary for them to have a cohesive narrative. They need to be self assured in their delivery and ultimately satisfying.
Ambiguity is fine. But Without Name left a number of plot points unresolved and plenty of unanswered questions. The story takes a back seat to the overwhelming visuals and presentation. This is sure to leave some viewers wanting. A little more time spent on plot construction as well as structuring a more satisfying ending would have entirely changed my opinion on this film.
“Lack of identity is part of the problem. The film mixes nature, mental illness, the supernatural, and mythology in the hope that it somehow gels together. It lacks structure.”
Updating this review in 2024, I can say, without question, that Lorcan Finnegan’s later effort, Nocebo, was a step up in terms of storytelling. I’m also holding out hope that his short movie Foxes, featured in the anthology Nightmare Radio: The Night Stalker, gets a full length remake sometime in the future. Both productions are more interesting than Without Name.
Acting and performances
Acting is, generally, very good. English actor Alan McKenna takes on the lead role of Eric. He holds the story together excellently. He convincingly portrays each side of Eric’s character. From frustrated husband right down to that of a person losing his grip on sanity.
His committed performance really shines, especially given the scope of the character and his experiences. James Browne is well cast as the traveller Gus. He comes across as a little strange and out there. Obviously this is entirely fitting given Gus’ nomadic, hippy, nature.
I didn’t find Niamh Algar, as Eric’s assistant and mistress Olivia, to be particularly noteworthy. I would go as far as to say that I found her to be somewhat unlikable. Even, dare I say it, annoying. Whether this is the intention or not, I am not sure. Olivia features minimal character development. It seems as though she is only there to help antagonise Eric and further illustrate his mental decline. I did enjoy Niamh Algar’s performance in From the Dark so I imagine she isn’t to blame.
It might be worth noting that Without Name contains male and female nudity as well as a brief, not particularly graphic, sex scene. It really doesn’t feel out of place and falls into the plot perfectly well. This type of thing doesn’t bother me. I know some people prefer to know so I will try to inform wherever applicable. Check the parental advisory section in the movie info either above or to the side depending on your device.
The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
The Good
- Stunning Cinematography: Piers McGrail delivers some of the most beautiful frames in modern indie horror, perfectly capturing the imposing nature of the Irish woods.
- Alan McKenna: Gives a committed and nuanced lead performance that convincingly charts the character’s slow descent into psychological collapse.
- Atmospheric Dread: The film excels at creating a sense of isolation and environmental claustrophobia that lingers throughout the runtime.
The Bad
- Convoluted Narrative: The story lacks a cohesive structure, often feeling like a collection of abstract themes rather than a compelling plot.
- Lack of Scares: Despite the buildup, the film rarely delivers on its horror potential, opting for psychological ambiguity over genuine thrills.
- Padding: Several scenes and narrative detours feel redundant, contributing to the feeling that the movie would have worked better as a short.
The Ugly: The Strobe Sequences. A visual assault that is both technically impressive and physically taxing, potentially excluding a large portion of the audience.
Should You Watch Without Name?
Yes, if you enjoy visual-first horror. It is a 2.8 star film that functions best as a beautiful, abstract art piece. If you value atmosphere and exceptional cinematography, Without Name is well worth your time. However, if you are seeking a tight story or a movie with traditional scares, you will likely find this frustrating and unfinished. It is an intelligent, technical curiosity that serves as a fascinating prelude to Lorcan Finnegan’s later work. It is a stunning, if slightly empty, journey into the trees.
Our Scoring Philosophy: A Fair Fight
Horror is a genre that thrives thanks to indie film makers and low budget creators. At Knockout Horror, we firmly believe that every movie that we review deserves a fair fight. That's why we grade on a curve. Our star ratings are all about context, judging a film on what it achieves with the resources it has.
A 4-star rating for a scrappy indie horror made for $10,000 is a testament to its ingenuity and raw power. A 4-star rating for a $100 million blockbuster means it delivered on its epic promises. We don't compare them side-by-side; we celebrate success in every weight class, from the back-alley brawler to the heavyweight champion. Please keep this in mind when considering star ratings.
Support the Site Knockout Horror is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. Basically, if you click a link to rent or buy a movie, we may earn a tiny commission at no extra cost to you. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. This helps keep the lights on and the nightmares coming. Don't worry, we will never recommend a movie purely to generate clicks. If it's bad, we will tell you.
Disclaimer: Images, posters, and video stills used in this review are the property of their respective copyright holders. They are included here for the purposes of commentary, criticism, and review under fair use. Knockout Horror makes no claim of ownership and encourages readers to support the official release of all films discussed.
