Hell House - A Origem

When an internet sleuth drags her girlfriend along to investigate the scene of a grisly massacre at a deserted mansion in the woods, they get more than they bargained for.

Over-produced found-footage that still manages to be effective. The ideal for this genre is to wind up the story like clockwork in the first ten minutes, then let it unwind through intelligent editing of the footage, allowing the audience to fill in the gaps. Instead this production gives us masses of exposition through the framing device of a mockumentary, with explanatory flashbacks, and inserts foreboding music where appropriate.

So the story has trouble standing on its own feet, with ho-hum plotting and characterisation, and in the end has to fall back into classic Blair Witch mode to reach its climax.

And despite the fussy direction, the in-scene motivations are poorly handled. You know you can run away, right, instead of shuffling? So that the audience might satisfy itself that every means of escape was tried, before this unstoppable evil had its way? Perhaps bolting and chaining the bedroom door might be in order - especially since the chain is hanging limp, in plain sight, in scene after scene? It won't do any good, but y'know ... And if a character is in terror of her life, the best thing to do is put the camera down while still trained on the action, so the audience doesn't have to wonder why she's still filming. If she needs the camera light to flee through the darkness, then that's OK. And of course: don't split up, and don't go toward the threat that just scared the bejebus out of you, etc. And it's not necessary to give a final homily on the nature of evil: we know what we just saw.

As for the figures of evil, I know many are creeped out just by the sight of clowns, but my first thought was, 'Oh, they hired some specialist mime artists for this bit - that's why they're so still. Do their noses get itchy?'

Yet the atmosphere is genuinely creepy, and I was mostly engaged throughout. Plus there is an original and excellent video conference weird-out at 45 mins that got my adrenaline buzzing. For that, and the mounting hysteria (a la BW, including a distant cry for help that sounds like the first victim) I rate it above average.

Its a decent horror movie but really the lead actress killed the whole experience for me , the way she acted the dialogues .. and the choices they make ..! I mean why wont they just leave !!!

Red flags all over the place .., and yet margo insist on staying there . And the funny part is shes just scared as they are .. bad writing terrible acting Really ruined this movie I really wanted margo to die .. and thats a bad factor in horror movie that you want the main character to die Hope the director learned his lesson never to work with this writer and actress again A lot of money wasted on this movie ...

I loved the original Hell House: great scares, reasonable characters, great premise. The other sequels lacked all of that.

This one delivers on the great scares. Great tension, effective use of jumpscares. The premise and characters are okay here. Not great but not egregious. There's a couple eye-roll moments where they try too hard to tie it into the original (the music now has lyrics? What?).

It sounds like I'm really down on it when all I have good to say about it is the scares, but really, the directing is great at ratcheting up the tension and then hitting you with a solid moment of horror.

I'm knocking a half point off though for the very last scene before the credits, which felt like a weird retcon that didn't need to be in the movie at all.

A lesbian couple and one of their siblings spend a few days in a mansion where a family was murdered right after the mass suicide at The Abaddon Hotel.

The original "Hell House LLC" is literally the only found-footage movie that I've ever liked. It felt realistic, the characters were compelling, and there were a few great scares. The first sequel made the mistake of trying to explain the history of the hotel, which the second pursued further (and with some of the most amateurish acting I've ever seen outside of '90s porn!).

Thankfully, this movie sort of went back to basics. The acting is generally natural, there are some decent creep-outs, and we're not bogged down with ridiculous details.

There are a couple of things that keep it from being truly great though. The first film, which centered on the opening of a house-of-horrors, had plenty of behind-the-scenes dramas among the characters. It felt like there was a full story there, where this feels like more of a Ghost Hunters sketch of a story. My other big problem is the clowns (and no, I don't have coulrophobia!). It made sense that the clowns were seen in a Halloween attraction, but the excuse for their appearance in this mansion seems pretty flimsy -- just like all of the other ties to The Abaddon Hotel.

Those gripes aside, it's well-made, a good popcorn flick, and recommended to anyone who liked the original. Also worth noting: a brief scene after the end credits teases another sequel.

This movie was really good, I think that it has a great set, the Carmichael Manor, the set was really large and had a lot of great hallways that the characters could walk through.

Personally, I think that the movie could have done away with a ton of the interviews that are interspersed throughout the run time. They really killed the momentum of the creep factor that the movie worked hard to get going. I think they were included so that the plot could be explained more in depth? Maybe so that the audience isn't lost in anyway?

I'd say its like eating a nice meal, then while you're eating it, the waiter comes out, takes the meal from you, and points to different parts of the meal and explains to you how the chef made it, and why it tastes good, you say, oh yeah, thanks, could've learned that later, and then the waiter sits it back down in front of you. Strange, but oh well, the food is good, I can deal with it. Then the waiter comes back and does it 5 more times, it gets tiring.

They could've saved the exposition dumps for the scenes that take place after the final climax of the movie, but they didn't for some reason.

The gore that is used, though sparingly, throughout the movie is well done, they weren't fake looking, they were slightly realistic, but the amount of blood that they did use wasn't to the point that it looked ridiculous, they use just the right amount for each scene they needed it.

The acting of the different characters seemed to falter in scenes where I guess the actors aren't proficient, but it didn't detract from the movie too much.

Overall, I don't regret watching this movie, the jump scares were innovative and kinda new, def a 7/10, would probably watch it again with new people.