Extrañas apariciones 2
Título original: The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia
CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.3/10
19 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Una familia se muda a una casa histórica en Georgia, solo para descubrir que no son sus únicos habitantes. Pronto se encuentran en presencia de un secreto que surge del subsuelo, capaz de de... Leer todoUna familia se muda a una casa histórica en Georgia, solo para descubrir que no son sus únicos habitantes. Pronto se encuentran en presencia de un secreto que surge del subsuelo, capaz de derribar a cualquiera que se cruce en su camino.Una familia se muda a una casa histórica en Georgia, solo para descubrir que no son sus únicos habitantes. Pronto se encuentran en presencia de un secreto que surge del subsuelo, capaz de derribar a cualquiera que se cruce en su camino.
Lauren Pennington
- Nell
- (as Lauren Whitney Pennington)
Wayne Pére
- Station Master - 1858
- (as Wayne Pere)
C. Stuart Rome
- Hooded Attacker
- (as Stuart Rome)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
A small family moves into a home in Georgia only to discover they are not alone. Soon they realize that the house holds a mysterious past...
Although I do not understand the title or the need to call it a sequel I thought this movie was good. It offered a solid background story with outstanding acting. The movie starts well paced and keeps going until the end. The climax I found to be a bit outlandish but good and the ending offers a good resolution the story. The horror scenes are well placed and not overdone. The set ties in well with the story and the production quality is excellent. This film will satisfy the horror movie junkie and is well worth your time.
Although I do not understand the title or the need to call it a sequel I thought this movie was good. It offered a solid background story with outstanding acting. The movie starts well paced and keeps going until the end. The climax I found to be a bit outlandish but good and the ending offers a good resolution the story. The horror scenes are well placed and not overdone. The set ties in well with the story and the production quality is excellent. This film will satisfy the horror movie junkie and is well worth your time.
This is loosely based on real events, which doesn't help explain the completely absurd title. Research into the Wyrick hauntings won't ruin the film for you however as the only comparison to recorded events are the names of the characters.
As with any horror movie these days there are plenty of stock thrills: ghosts in white dresses, waking from a dream to find you are still in a dream, swings that move by themselves etc. The best thing about this film is that the characters are quite likable and you do become invested in their welfare. There's enough twists and turns to keep you guessing at the real nature of the evil. The breakout star is Emily Alyn Lind, who is so adorable that you want to reach into the movie and rescue her yourself, her plight not helped by her somewhat inconscient father who encourages her friendship with an old dead guy if it means directions to hidden treasure. His commitment to his daughter is only outweighed by his commitment to their hapless rescue dog.
The two female leads are nicely balanced. All the women in this 'see dead people', and it's how they handle it that is the crux of the film, their conflicting reactions and opinions driving the plot forward as the truth is revealed. This is obviously low budget, shots of the forest using various filters providing the atmosphere, the gore is minimal and the special effects fairly low key, but enough here to give you a tingle, even if it's only the fact that Mr Gordy really did appear to Heidi and he gets his photo in the end credits.
As with any horror movie these days there are plenty of stock thrills: ghosts in white dresses, waking from a dream to find you are still in a dream, swings that move by themselves etc. The best thing about this film is that the characters are quite likable and you do become invested in their welfare. There's enough twists and turns to keep you guessing at the real nature of the evil. The breakout star is Emily Alyn Lind, who is so adorable that you want to reach into the movie and rescue her yourself, her plight not helped by her somewhat inconscient father who encourages her friendship with an old dead guy if it means directions to hidden treasure. His commitment to his daughter is only outweighed by his commitment to their hapless rescue dog.
The two female leads are nicely balanced. All the women in this 'see dead people', and it's how they handle it that is the crux of the film, their conflicting reactions and opinions driving the plot forward as the truth is revealed. This is obviously low budget, shots of the forest using various filters providing the atmosphere, the gore is minimal and the special effects fairly low key, but enough here to give you a tingle, even if it's only the fact that Mr Gordy really did appear to Heidi and he gets his photo in the end credits.
"Ghosts Of Georgia" follows a young family starting out in a new home with not a lot of money but plenty of land and love in a small town in Georgia. It is a place steeped in history as the family soon learns. As part of the Underground Railroad. Soon paranormal events begin to unfold as the family settles in with most of the activity centering around the gifts of the female members of the family. The story is sold as a sequel to the original film of the same title but is a completely stand along event with no correlation. It is one of the most famous haunting cases in the paranormal investigative world and also one my favorite creepy tales. "Ghosts Of Georgia" was the directorial debut of Tom Elkins who worked on several other movies about ghosts.The film stars Abigail Spencer, Chad Michael Murray, Katee Sackhoff and Emily Alyn Lind all of whom give a pretty standard performance except for Emily who played Heidi. Her performance was far exceeding of the standard capabilities and almost showed the young actress to possess talent like such actresses' as Chloe Moretz or Dakota Fanning.
I wasn't expecting much going into this film mostly due to the ridiculous title of the picture but I actually enjoyed the film. There was the basic elements here to be far more scarier but where held back by standard effects tricks that now plague paranormal movies almost to the point of making them boring. Yet at moments I felt actual suspense and eerie tension as more dramatic scenes unfolded into real chilling events. The setting and story was creepy and the film version held a far more haunting presence than what I originally imagined from the actual story. The film veered from the true paranormal case with a more morbid, dark representation of the evil spirit haunting the land as well as the family. The action sequences were produced well creating a relief from the mediocre dramatic moments that tended to case me to drift off. I found "Ghosts Of Georgia" to be a far better ghost flick it's predecessor and think the film could have gained a better reception from audiences had they not gone with the title. This film had a great set up, acceptable acting, plus all the expected moments of creepy chilling paranormal activity. It isn't going to be a movie that really scares the hell out of anyone over the age of ten but it is a great movie about a haunting. The only downside was the very end after the amped up climax that felt way to hallmark-y, coming off completely cheesy and made for TV. I would tell people to see it and expect a better movie than "The Haunting In Connecticut" or "The Apparition" but don't expect the same amount of fright that you get with "The Amityville Horror" or even "Grave Encounters".
I wasn't expecting much going into this film mostly due to the ridiculous title of the picture but I actually enjoyed the film. There was the basic elements here to be far more scarier but where held back by standard effects tricks that now plague paranormal movies almost to the point of making them boring. Yet at moments I felt actual suspense and eerie tension as more dramatic scenes unfolded into real chilling events. The setting and story was creepy and the film version held a far more haunting presence than what I originally imagined from the actual story. The film veered from the true paranormal case with a more morbid, dark representation of the evil spirit haunting the land as well as the family. The action sequences were produced well creating a relief from the mediocre dramatic moments that tended to case me to drift off. I found "Ghosts Of Georgia" to be a far better ghost flick it's predecessor and think the film could have gained a better reception from audiences had they not gone with the title. This film had a great set up, acceptable acting, plus all the expected moments of creepy chilling paranormal activity. It isn't going to be a movie that really scares the hell out of anyone over the age of ten but it is a great movie about a haunting. The only downside was the very end after the amped up climax that felt way to hallmark-y, coming off completely cheesy and made for TV. I would tell people to see it and expect a better movie than "The Haunting In Connecticut" or "The Apparition" but don't expect the same amount of fright that you get with "The Amityville Horror" or even "Grave Encounters".
Overall, THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA, does a good job delivering what it promises, despite the idiotic tie to its namesake movie. Folks, this film has literally nothing to do with the first film NOR Connecticut, even tangentially, and the transparent money grab in the title was all at once deceptive, obvious, and detrimental to the movie's image. So much so, I almost didn't watch it.
So why did I watch? The simple answer is Abigail Spencer, a truly fine actor I first encountered in her role on the excellent TV series RECTIFY. Spencer is spot on and was the driving force behind this movie. Her performance as a clairvoyant mom-in-denial from a family of clairvoyants is well executed -- not her best work I've seen, but just very good. Nevermind the script is a rife with clichés and could have offered so much more to work with had the writer been on his game. Spencer still digs in and elevates her character beyond what one would expect from both a weak script and the genre. I predict there are big things in the future for this skilled actor.
Not that the other actors gave poor performances. Katee Sackhoff, whose acting can be hit or miss (which may be a function of her choice of roles), delivered a good performance and especially rang true as Spencer's sister. There's an undeniable sibling vibe between the two, and this helps the movie.
Chad Michael Murray adds some fairly non-substantive beefcake to the mix. He didn't make any big mistakes, but it's hard to mess up showing off a polished physique and looking hot in jeans. Finally, toward the end, he hits the sweet spot in a dialog with Spencer that reveals he actually can act at more than just a surface level of non-wooden competence. It's an important scene, and he gamely rises to the occasion.
A juvenile Emily Alyn Lind and her chin deliver a performance better than anything I've seen in her young adult roles. She was god awful in the recent THE BABYSITTER: KILLER QUEEN, and this movie is a reminder that she can actually act if she could just get out of her own way.
I would be remiss not to mention the great Cicely Tyson, positively the most unnerving though benign character in the film. She accomplishes more in a few short minutes of screen time than most of actors can in an hour. She's a national treasure, brilliant and timeless, as always.
What hurts THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA most of all is the aforementioned weak script by David Coggeshall. It stays on track and doesn't lose focus, but it also somehow lacks excitement. It occasionally plods, but that's not the worst of it. It moves in a straight line, and mostly lacks the reversals and twists that create true suspense. Dialog is its main strength, and at its best, it reads as real and well though out. There's very little throwaway jawing. Oh that dialog were all a script needed to succeed. Coggeshall has an impressive list of credits -- maybe he just wasn't feeling it on this one.
More, director Tom Elkins, an apparently first-time director, seemed to play it a little bit safe. It appears he stayed in his lane rather than try to remediate. Overall, however, a good first film for a new director, which could have been great had his more experienced scriptwriter handed him something less in need of fixing.
Otherwise, the production values were good. The camera work is focused and clear, even in dark scenes; the color saturation is good; the lighting is atmospheric; and the sparse special effects, while not at all original (are we getting tired of the elastic ghoulie scream mouth yet), are clean and well done. It would have been cool if the filmmakers had followed the lead of, for example, the Hearse Driver in BURNT OFFERINGS, whose smile haunted me in the dark for years. Let the actors be scary. They can do it, and without the help of a computer!
The sound, too, was good: the dialog was crisp and clear, the sound effects were correct, the Foley artists exercised restraint, and the music provided atmosphere while not competing with more important elements of the film.
There are a lot of good things to say about THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA. I debated between a 6- and 7-star rating. Unfortunately, the good can't overcome the deficiencies in this movie's founding document.
Recommendation: Watch for good performances and good production values, while understanding the script overall is workmanlike at best, though not full of holes and sporting some pretty decent dialog.
So why did I watch? The simple answer is Abigail Spencer, a truly fine actor I first encountered in her role on the excellent TV series RECTIFY. Spencer is spot on and was the driving force behind this movie. Her performance as a clairvoyant mom-in-denial from a family of clairvoyants is well executed -- not her best work I've seen, but just very good. Nevermind the script is a rife with clichés and could have offered so much more to work with had the writer been on his game. Spencer still digs in and elevates her character beyond what one would expect from both a weak script and the genre. I predict there are big things in the future for this skilled actor.
Not that the other actors gave poor performances. Katee Sackhoff, whose acting can be hit or miss (which may be a function of her choice of roles), delivered a good performance and especially rang true as Spencer's sister. There's an undeniable sibling vibe between the two, and this helps the movie.
Chad Michael Murray adds some fairly non-substantive beefcake to the mix. He didn't make any big mistakes, but it's hard to mess up showing off a polished physique and looking hot in jeans. Finally, toward the end, he hits the sweet spot in a dialog with Spencer that reveals he actually can act at more than just a surface level of non-wooden competence. It's an important scene, and he gamely rises to the occasion.
A juvenile Emily Alyn Lind and her chin deliver a performance better than anything I've seen in her young adult roles. She was god awful in the recent THE BABYSITTER: KILLER QUEEN, and this movie is a reminder that she can actually act if she could just get out of her own way.
I would be remiss not to mention the great Cicely Tyson, positively the most unnerving though benign character in the film. She accomplishes more in a few short minutes of screen time than most of actors can in an hour. She's a national treasure, brilliant and timeless, as always.
What hurts THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA most of all is the aforementioned weak script by David Coggeshall. It stays on track and doesn't lose focus, but it also somehow lacks excitement. It occasionally plods, but that's not the worst of it. It moves in a straight line, and mostly lacks the reversals and twists that create true suspense. Dialog is its main strength, and at its best, it reads as real and well though out. There's very little throwaway jawing. Oh that dialog were all a script needed to succeed. Coggeshall has an impressive list of credits -- maybe he just wasn't feeling it on this one.
More, director Tom Elkins, an apparently first-time director, seemed to play it a little bit safe. It appears he stayed in his lane rather than try to remediate. Overall, however, a good first film for a new director, which could have been great had his more experienced scriptwriter handed him something less in need of fixing.
Otherwise, the production values were good. The camera work is focused and clear, even in dark scenes; the color saturation is good; the lighting is atmospheric; and the sparse special effects, while not at all original (are we getting tired of the elastic ghoulie scream mouth yet), are clean and well done. It would have been cool if the filmmakers had followed the lead of, for example, the Hearse Driver in BURNT OFFERINGS, whose smile haunted me in the dark for years. Let the actors be scary. They can do it, and without the help of a computer!
The sound, too, was good: the dialog was crisp and clear, the sound effects were correct, the Foley artists exercised restraint, and the music provided atmosphere while not competing with more important elements of the film.
There are a lot of good things to say about THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT 2: THE GHOSTS OF GEORGIA. I debated between a 6- and 7-star rating. Unfortunately, the good can't overcome the deficiencies in this movie's founding document.
Recommendation: Watch for good performances and good production values, while understanding the script overall is workmanlike at best, though not full of holes and sporting some pretty decent dialog.
This movie has everything, amazing story, scary moments which anyone wants in Horror movie. It's comparable to Conjuring and Nun. It has more scary moments than both of them. Being a fan of Conjuring and Nun horror movies, whatever, I watched it won't satisfied my expectations as it's hard to find a decent horror movie with good storyline. Actually,all horror movies are same, the same haunted house story or a person being possessed. However, this story is so broad. It not only has several scary moments but also has some mysteries too. This is just wholesome, that's I really wanted in a horror movie. Perfection!!
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaAccording to screenwriter David Coggeshall, this movie was never intended to be any kind of sequel to Extrañas apariciones (2009) and they only became "related" when Gold Circle, the studio behind both movies, decided they wanted to try and capitalize on the success of the first movie.
- ErroresAccording to the dates on the screen, the moon is full on three nights in July over a period of 20 days.
- Créditos curiososAt the beginning of the credits, the names that appear are turning from white into bloody red.
- ConexionesFollowed by The Haunting in New York
- Bandas sonorasCountry Kind of Way
Performed by Amy Wallace and Kai Brown
Written by Kai Brown, Andrew Bush and Amy Wallace
Courtesy of Amy Wallace
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 9,000,000 (estimado)
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 5,127,434
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the Italian language plot outline for Extrañas apariciones 2 (2013)?
Responda