Watch Return to House on Haunted Hill For Free
Return to House on Haunted Hill
Eight years have passed since Sara Wolfe and Eddie Baker escaped the House on Haunted Hill. Now the kidnapped Ariel, Sara's sister, goes inside the house with a group of treasure hunters to find the statue of Baphomet, worth millions and believed to be the cause of the House's evil.
Release : | 2007 |
Rating : | 4.5 |
Studio : | Dark Castle Entertainment, Warner Premiere, |
Crew : | Art Department Coordinator, Art Department Coordinator, |
Cast : | Amanda Righetti Cerina Vincent Erik Palladino Jeffrey Combs Andrew Pleavin |
Genre : | Horror Thriller |
Watch Trailer
Cast List
Related Movies
Reviews
Simply Perfect
Fresh and Exciting
It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.
A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.
Return to House on Haunted Hill picks off from a few years after the original story. It actually focuses on the sister of one of the participants of the original film Sarah. Sarah has been killed in this film as she failed to cooperate with thugs with information about the house. This story involves around a valuable statue which is located in the heart of the house, which the thugs want.The beginning of the film did actually make me feel kind of sad as we learn about Sarah's murder (framed as suicide). I thought the acting of her sister Ariel was pretty poor. Considering that her sister had committed suicide (No one knows of her actually being murdered at this point, she only shed a few tears. After a few minutes she was fine.Ariel and her boyfriend then get kidnapped and taken at gunpoint to the house, to find the statue. Then the movie really does start to get a bit disturbing. There's a lot of gruesome scenes with some death of the characters. What i do like is how the characters get shown flashbacks of what the house was like before they die, i thought that was a clever idea.The main part of this story is mostly getting the statue and escaping the house. It tends to drag at this point. Yeah a few characters die in quite disturbing ways but nothing much else.Towards the last half hour of the film we actually learn that the statue holds the key on releasing all of the trapped spirits in the house. Again i thought that this was a clever twist of the story. The thought never came into my mind about.Overall i thought this film was a good sequel to the first story. You got to see more of the fantastic design inside and outside of the house. My complaints of the other film was that there wasn't much to see of the exterior design, but in this version there is a lot more shown. There is an awful lot of blood, guts and limbs thrown everywhere; which is always cool! I do recommend this movie but only after you have seen the original in 1999; as this is technically part 2.
Contrived sequel to the remake from eight years earlier (which didn't exactly call out for a follow up) starts out decently, but then progressively gets worse, as a group of obnoxious individuals that no one cares remotely about are forced to return to the house on Haunted Hill to find a Baphomet statue which no one cares remotely about either. Even at only 80 minutes, it still seems padded and slowly paced. The mutilated, lesbian ghost makeout session is the nadir of this barely-related, direct-to-DVD sequel to the 1999 remake of House On Haunted Hill. The 1999 remake was no prize winner, but offered a few more thrills than this dreck.Not even "so bad it's good", just terrible, contrived and convoluted, gory and ultimately rather pointless, because nobody cares about this film's MacGuffin. Its non-success has thankfully spared us Yet Another Return to House On Haunted Hill. I have a wonderful idea: how about if we never, ever, ever return the House on Haunted Hill again?
I'm not sure as a whole if this one needed to be made or not,, think maybe they should have titled it differently since it really didn't follow it's predecessor. yeah there is some backstory,, and the Dr. is creepy, I just didn't buy into all of the Knights Templar stuff and the occult stuff going on,, not to say it didn't happen that way,, I just didn't buy into it,, the acting is not the greatest.. but the special effects were a home run,, always nice to have half naked,, women running around in a horror film, the film had some laughs,, lot's of blood guts and gore which was good , this film was slightly above average if you ignore it as a sequel and to try and just what it like pretending its got a different name,, that's how I enjoyed it better.
I actually didn't dislike this movie's prequel, House on Haunted Hill - I gave it a 7. Its good-sized budget and well-known cast probably swayed my decision some.This sequel appears to have a better budget than most direct-to-video releases, though of course it comes nowhere close to its predecessor. Same with its cast. The story, actually, seems to have more in common with Thir13en Ghosts, since each of the gang trapped in the haunted house meet different kinds of ghosts with distinct personalities, which was fairly entertaining. I think the problem with the movie is that it blew its limited budget on special effects and makeup but to ho-hum effect. The ghosties and set look decent but the scares weren't there and the story and cast weren't up to scratch.