At random, the announcement that Hell House LLC 2 was coming to Shudder just hours ago popped into my head and I decided to take a look as I enjoyed the very creepy atmosphere of the original.
This one goes on to reveal even more about the Abaddon Hotel, where the Hell House "event" opened during the first film and things get suitable creepy once again. There are a number of moments where I noticed myself tense and almost holding my breath, just as with the first one. But just like the first one, I felt the ending was weak, it feels messy and a bit too exposition heavy, and just not very scary.
That's not to say the film isn't scary as a whole, there are plenty of eerie scenes that really have the ability to just creep you right out. They're so simple too and I think that's why they work, it doesn't feel overdone or over produced (I'm looking at you, The Nun). They let the unnerving moments linger, and all feels like it could be real, which is what you want with found footage. This is a film where it's low budget actually helps in that department.
I think the weakest aspect of the film is the acting, which is noticeably worse the first, where I felt those actors did a fine job, I don't recall ever thinking about their acting skills and everything seems believable. In Hell House LLC 2 the acting gives the production a bit more of an amateur feel. However once things get going the tension takes over and the actors also seem to improve for the most part. Except for one person, who's physical acting and dialogue delivery was just subpar the whole way through.
This one also tends to jump around a lot more than the first and feels a tad messy, but really the tension in this makes up for most shortcomings. It's obvious that writer/director Stephen Cognetti is a talented guy. When he's in the zone with the scary aspects he pretty much nails it, both in the first film and in this one. For fans of the first I would definitely recommend it. It's more of the same really, but still manages to be very creepy when it tries to be. I'd really like to see what Cognetti could do with more resources and a larger budget.
This one goes on to reveal even more about the Abaddon Hotel, where the Hell House "event" opened during the first film and things get suitable creepy once again. There are a number of moments where I noticed myself tense and almost holding my breath, just as with the first one. But just like the first one, I felt the ending was weak, it feels messy and a bit too exposition heavy, and just not very scary.
That's not to say the film isn't scary as a whole, there are plenty of eerie scenes that really have the ability to just creep you right out. They're so simple too and I think that's why they work, it doesn't feel overdone or over produced (I'm looking at you, The Nun). They let the unnerving moments linger, and all feels like it could be real, which is what you want with found footage. This is a film where it's low budget actually helps in that department.
I think the weakest aspect of the film is the acting, which is noticeably worse the first, where I felt those actors did a fine job, I don't recall ever thinking about their acting skills and everything seems believable. In Hell House LLC 2 the acting gives the production a bit more of an amateur feel. However once things get going the tension takes over and the actors also seem to improve for the most part. Except for one person, who's physical acting and dialogue delivery was just subpar the whole way through.
This one also tends to jump around a lot more than the first and feels a tad messy, but really the tension in this makes up for most shortcomings. It's obvious that writer/director Stephen Cognetti is a talented guy. When he's in the zone with the scary aspects he pretty much nails it, both in the first film and in this one. For fans of the first I would definitely recommend it. It's more of the same really, but still manages to be very creepy when it tries to be. I'd really like to see what Cognetti could do with more resources and a larger budget.