Mar 09 2009
Return to House on Haunted Hill (Review)
RETURN TO HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL (2007)
Starring Cerina Vincent (Cabin Fever)
When it comes to direct-to-video sequels, horror films get the worst treatment. It has gotten to the point where every horror movie has at least one sequel and 75% of the time it goes straight to DVD. Now, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they are bad sequels, but movies like Return to House on Haunted Hill make a very good argument against.
I haven’t been the biggest fan of the Haunted Hill films, but they’re decent. The Vincent Price version was a little cheesy in its dated attempts at terror, but still has the cheesy fun element to it and the story itself is decent. The 1999 remake was pretty dopey, but it took some interesting twist and turns so that you’re distracted enough not to notice the horrible writing. Now, with Return to House on Haunted Hill, we have a tired and cliché haunted house movie that not only doesn’t live up to it’s predecessors, it’s almost a parody of them. Any kind of logic that may have been established in the last two movies is GONE.
Previously, the Haunted Hill movies were about a bunch of people who came to a haunted house and stayed the night for money. Drama occurs and people get killed. Return to House on Haunted Hill picks up right after the remake. Ariel, the sister of one of the survivors from the house, discovers her sister commits suicide. While trying to figure out why she killed herself, the movie stumbles into a plot about the statue of the evil god Baphomet that is worth a lot of money. Kudos to the director for making a sequel of a remake and taking it in a new direction, but, really, treasure hunting? Yes, treasure hunting.
Later on, Ariel, her friend Paul, and Professor Richard are kidnapped by a gang that apparently dabbles in treasure hunting. They force all of them back into the haunted house where the gang plays a predictable game of Scooby Doo. As they aimlessly search the house, the ghosts of Dr. Vannacutt and his patients appear and kill them as the gang leader keeps denying that ghosts exist. Despite a ghost lesbian scene, there is nothing new here horror wise. Sure, there is some solid organ removals and limb tearing, but it’s a far-cry from the 1999 remake which had some much more creative kills.
My biggest problem with the movie is undeniably the cinematography. Taking a cue from the Saw movies, all the scenes involving the ghosts are edited into quick shots with lots of flashes. Is that supposed to be more frightening or hardcore? Dialogue wise, it’s predictably dopey. Why is it so hard for these direct-to-video movies do have decent dialogue or even competent actors? Its not rocket science. And, I’m sorry, but the whole National Treasure plot seems a bit farfetched even for this kind of movie. I mean, the whole point of Haunted Hill is to get people in a haunted house and kill them. Why do you have to through this idiotic plot device to get there?
DVD Dump Counter:
-1 sliced off face.
-1 ghost lesbian three-way.
-1 man’s intestines yanked.
-1 man split by the limbs via bed sheets.
-1 death via water-monster.
-1 cut open brain.
-1 man burned alive.
-1 Indiana Jones idol.
RATING: C-Movie
There is nothing particularly horrible about this movie, but there is nothing good about it either. If you’re not looking for anything new or interesting in the way horrific haunted house movies, Return to House on Haunted Hill is an average horror movie. But the fact that it bares the name and attempts to be a sequel to the 1999 House on Haunted Hill makes it a big disappointment. I’ve seen worse direct-to-video sequels, but that’s all the praise I can give this movie.
