Review of ‘Paranormal Activity’ (Ambassadors, 2025): “Stage addition to the movie franchise is terrifically horrible but not that haunting”

The West End’s festive season takes a dark turn with the theatrical version of the legendary film saga. Guillermo Nazara shares his views on the show to let us know if its new supernatural plot put him through the witching hour.

I want to believe, but modern horror isn’t making it easy for me. Gone are the days when the genre reached its peak, as William Peter Blatty’s best-selling novel and later Hollywood classic The Exorcist became a symbol of craftsmanship, pushing boundaries and raising the standards like never before. Besides a few other titles, horror seems to have come back to its B-list roots, with stories consisting of a cluster of jump scares woven together by an often thin and fickle thread.

I’ve never seen any of the Paranormal Activity films. You won’t need to before watching the show. Apart from its title, there’s no real connection to its screen counterparts other than, obviously, its subject matter. It will also hit closer to home to any regular West End attendee — the characters may be from Chicago, but the plot takes place in their recently acquired London suburban house. It’s a recurrent yet clever move to add a sense of proximity to the tale. The relatability is also prominent on a supernatural level. The couple moved to the city one week before, and instead of getting stabbed, they are being terrorised by some evil presence.

Written by Levi Holloway and directed by Felix Barret, the show features every possible trick in the Horror for Dummies book. The lights go off for long periods in between scenes. Sudden noises break the action to surely-it-must-have-been-the-wind outcomes. One of the leads is a firm believer, while the other has annoying Dana Scully tendencies. And of course, creaking doors open and close by themselves as the stress intensifies and the ghosts materialise.

It doesn’t brim with originality, neither conceptually nor in its execution. However, that doesn’t compromise its engaging quality. Overall, the piece is thoroughly entertaining. Is it perfect? Hell no! (no pun intended). There are massive plot holes, the character arcs are sketchy at best, and the tension escalates far too quickly, inevitably leading to noticeable pacing issues, particularly in Act One.

It’s still enticing storytelling — flawed on many levels, but amusing nonetheless. The script doesn’t take itself too seriously, and neither does it ask audiences to do so. It delivers what it promises, and to some extent, it walks the extra mile — though perhaps only half of it. Essentially a two-hander, apart from two scenes, the recount makes an adequate attempt at delving into the personages’ psyches. Both come from dramatically compelling backgrounds, and the baggage they both carry acts as the cornerstone of their conflict.

They could have given us more, however. The play brings up several gripping themes related to parental issues, eroded relationships, and the loss and regaining of faith. Holloway’s intent to elevate the material through strokes of poignancy is evident and welcome. Yet, his efforts are only moderate, and they shy away before their effects are tangible. Consequently, the action can hook us, but the characters can never move us, resulting in an enjoyable but gimmicky narrative.

The script doesn’t overflow with resources to build its universe either. We are not given enough tools to go from skeptics to converts, even though we’re witnesses to the strange phenomena happening inside that house. The text fails to explore its lore extensively enough to make it credible beyond its walls. That sense of peril the spectators should have, thinking what they’re witnessing might occur in real life despite its fantastical tone, is missing. Therefore, the show can give audiences a fright, but they will hardly be haunted by it after leaving the venue.

A note from the author tells us not to reveal the play’s secret. I’m tempted, though. And as you probably know, I don’t like to be told what to do… but I’ll comply. I will say, however, that the illusions and overall staging are the actual winners of the evening. Fly Davis’s figurative design offers us an intricate profile view of the protagonists’ two-story home. Despite the absence of set changes, the performance manages to convey high dynamism, especially when each character is on a different floor, and the most imaginable things unfold beyond our eyes.

The entire cast gives a robust performance that exudes chemistry, rapport, and truthfulness. Both Patrick Heusinger and Melissa James complement each other marvelously in the lead roles, which they portray with nuance and flair. Jackie Morrison earns another mention through her brief appearance as psychic Etheline Cotgrave, whose unfortunate surname doesn’t prevent her from delivering a poised, honest, and reassuring rendition as the bridge between the dead and the living.

If they advertise this show as not suitable for the faint-hearted, you may believe them. Yet, don’t give that observation more credit than it actually deserves. Paranormal Activity may have manifested onstage, but its enduring powers are yet to be tested.

Those coming just for the thrill of the experience will be pleasantly horrified by its striking special effects and generally well-established buildups. However, the expectation for an arresting plot might end up cursing you for the rest of your life. It makes as much sense as it makes séance, but its feebleness can’t be ignored anyway. And if you’re bringing a friend, remember to tap them in the neck during its multiple blackouts — just for shock value.

This site is proudly sponsored by

All pictures credit to Johan Persson.

Paranormal Activity plays at London’s Ambassadors Theatre until 28 March. Tickets are available on the following link.

By Guillermo Nazara