Hallettsville

Didn't expect a lot with a rating of 3.6, but was pleasantly surprised. The effects were great, especially considering the budget, and it wasn't as cliché as I thought it would be. The premise of the story was interesting; however, it could have been fleshed out better, and the ending was weak. Mostly the acting was nothing special, but Gary Busey and Jesse Janzen were good.

The main reason I liked it was because the characters in this horror flick had very strong survival instincts--you don't see them making dumb choices left and right and it makes it more believable, tense, and scary.

When I saw this in the theater, I was expecting to see a predictable, low budget cut horror movie. That we would just get bored with. But I was wrong. This has to be one of the most clever movies. Believe me, this was an awesome thriller. Andrew Pozza should stick to movies like this, It had a wonderful cast. Nice lines. Scary moments. Classic horror scenes that will keep you at the edge of your seat. Though not a movie that you'll rewind and want to watch again and again. Too predictable. The ending was OK could have been better.

So, if you have good taste in horror movies, or are looking for something original, watch this film. Its OK for a fun weekend horror mara! 7/10

Well, some will find this a horror flick straight out of the books. Sure, it has the typical ingredients: a group of youngsters with individual characters and problems, an abandoned house, ghostly legends, policemen that are there just to be slashed, women that are just there to scream, that kind of stuff. So hey, if you're into this, please see this movie. But be warned: the acting is off the charts horrible, the story makes no sense whatsoever, and the character development and/or description failed in every way.

Since I'm not an entirely evil person, I will add some positive remarks. I liked especially the special effects inside the house. They were not innovating, but they do give you the necessary scare. Secondly, the story could be workable. I believe a better writer (and better actors) could have pulled off a much better story.

3 out of 10 for the positive remarks, which are then only based on the effects. As for the whole experience: don't torture me again!

It's a B movie, so does it make it okay for the film to suck? And if it is so, then why bother making such movies, and why do people bother to even watch such movies? It's because B movies doesn't mean that it can be okay to suck, it just means that the movie lacks known actors, and it doesn't have huge funds to make the movie.

So pardon me for saying that this film failed big time.

The nonsensical storyline, long-winded plots, lame dialogs, made this film bad. And Busey's couldn't help to raise the bar.

On the plus side, there are some scary moments, but still not enough for it to warrant a better rating than a 2/10 stars.

While attempting to look in on a family house before it gets sold, a group of friends find themselves the victim of a murderous spirit who has far more sinister plans for the group than they initially figured.

This one wasn't really all that spectacular, mostly due to the fact that this one doesn't exploit it's pretty decent premise for all it's worth. This one could've been pretty good with it's storyline about the hauntings within the house, possession and such, but instead it manages to focus on the kids' problems and never really gets anything going since we're stuck dealing with their issues that aren't interesting or even appropriate in the film. That leads to the final part of the film generating anything good, which is actually somewhat decent with some pretty good encounters with the spirit and a pretty god bit of innovation in having outsiders who they stumble upon believe their story instead of just writing it off as demented rambling, which adds a sense of realism to the film. Still, this one could've been much better.

Rated R: Graphic Language and Violence.