House of Fears (2007) User Reviews (28)

Jared Padalecki blink and miss moment

[Jester222 · 4/10 · 8 August 2020]

This is an ok by the numbers cliche ridden horror. Zero originality but ok to watch if nothing better to do. Usual annoying characters, zero plot.

Puzzling is that at the party scene Jared Padalecki (Supernatural/Friday the 13th Remake) appears in a doorway and promptly disappears!? Is this a cameo? In joke? Friend of director? When I sae him him I knsta fly thought.....ah the quality if the film just got a little better if he's in it.......then hes never seen again.

Most odd.

Watch if nothing better to see. Far better films in though. Maybe it was a Directors first film and way into the industry. Its shot well etc and is far from terrible. Just unoriginal.

House of Fears: Forgettable

[Platypuschow · 6/10 · 20 October 2017]

Every night I'll trundle upstairs to bed and stick a film on, very often I'll roll the dice and watch the first one I see on Youtube which is normally a big mistake.

This time I came across House Of Fears starring Corey Sevier and found myself interested in this mid budget horror title which has overwhelming similarities to Dark House (2009).

I ended up falling asleep and chose to pick it up the next day only to realise upon going on IMDb that I'd already seen it.

This is the first time this has ever happened, though a couple of scenes seemed familiar (Especially the sand pit part) I thought it was just because I watch so many films.

What does this tell you about House Of Fears? That though it isn't a bad film, it's instantly forgettable!

The Good:

Perfectly watchable effort

Decent concept

The Bad:

Generic Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I am capable of forgetting a watched a film altogether even when watched again!

A fun movie, but stays in it's horror bounds

[jackrabbittt333 · 6/10 · 11 December 2007]

i saw this a month or 2 ago at a horror festival in LA. if you're going into this knowing it will be just another horror movie where horny teens end up somewhere and get hacked up, that's what it is. What makes the film interesting is the cinematography and creatism of the killings, and the mansion as a whole. it was shot very coolly (I know this isn't a word), some good temperatures to convey moods and the diff rooms / fears etc.. the ending though was unfortunately predictable, much like the characters. I found myself shouting at the screen, "just go! He's gonna get you!" etc.. i was engaged, but for the wrong reasons. the film had the same cheesy girl in distress, big hunky guy leads the pack, funny guy and black dude. very well done for the budget. Some of the acting needed to be tightened, A LOT. Michael Pagan was the best, I'd like to see him again. Eliot Benjamin was relatively funny, and he looks to be pretty new so good luck to his career. The movie didn't attempt to change or go beyond the horror genre that we've been looking at for the past "forever," but again, if you go in knowing this, you'll end up liking it. it's very fun, and a good time. I'd definitely watch it again. on a scale of 1 - 10 in horror land, i give it a 6.5 while in overall movie land, i give it a 4.

Jp

House of LAME

[OX_Bigly · 1/10 · 9 May 2012]

I thought this was going to be a spooky clown film... Nope.

The movie gave it's own best comment: "This is a house of lame". You can use this.. um... "film"? as a horror movie cliché check list.

This thing was like a made for TV movie commissioned and then rejected by the CW network. It seems to me they over spent on this thing. I've seen films with a lower budget that where ten times better because of the story and plot. The general idea (freaky statue that actually makes your fears come to life and kill you) was good but could have been done way better. The film sets itself up for potential awesome (band name) but falls short on delivering.

The only good I can see come from this film is if someone from Thatguywiththeglasses covers it.

If Riftrax does this I would definitely be willing to sit through it again. Honestly I hope the makers of House of Fears either learn from the mistakes made here and go on to make much better films, or find a new line of work.

I will give the film one good point: Towards the beginning one of the guys dresses up as a killer and jumps out at the others. One of the other guys punches him. That has to be in more horror films.

In the end it's NOT a horror film and not even a suspense film. It should have been titled "Wasted Potential" that would have been more accurate.

This is probably the only "horror" film more boring than The Blair Witch Project

House of Dumb and Derivative

[Coventry · 2/10 · 12 November 2009]

Quickly judging by the brief synopsis and a peek at the picture stills on the back of the DVD cover, "House of Fears" simply looks like just another umpteenth dull new horror slasher with an unoriginal plot, pretty but one-dimensional teen characters and tame and uninspired killing sequences. Well, after watching the whole film, I can safely say that this overall superficial and hastily drawn impression is … completely accurate. Sad but true, "House of Fears" is as dumb and derivative as it looks, and I simply cannot believe that in this day and age – with an horror offer that is already supersaturated – producers are still willing to put money into projects like these. The set-up couldn't be more clichéd and the last time I've seen such a big collection of stereotypical characters was in the early 80's. We have the group of quintessential teens including: the wannabe funny guy who can't score with the chicks, the vainglorious pretty sister, the timid and nerdy sister who's actually a major babe if you have a closer look, the hunky jock who's a romanticist underneath his macho looks, the black guy who hates and criticizes but meanwhile dates the dumb Paris Hilton look-alike character and – of course – the Paris Hilton look-alike character. All together, they decide to walk out of a party in order to sneak into a nearby carnival attraction before its official opening. Now where have I heard that premise before …? Oh, I remember now, in about three dozen other mediocre horror flicks. The attraction, the House of Fears, supposedly is the best thing out there in carny land. It's a ghost house that guarantees to petrify all of its visitors with statues and images of the twelve most commonly spread phobias, like clowns, knives, spiders etc. Personally, I'm afraid of little people so the house won't scare me. Ha! Anyway, one little relic inside the house will turn the teenagers' night into the ordeal of their life, namely an African mini-statue that actually generates people's deepest fears and brings the monsters to life. I see what you're thinking … How bad can a movie possibly be when it features murderous clowns, pale-skinned undertakers and scarecrow monsters? I honestly don't know, but "House is Fears" is boring, unexciting, stupid and 100% suspense-free. There's a scene early in the film, showing a woman shopping for sinister scenery for the House of Fears in Africa and discovering the cursed statue. This scene is completely irrelevant and I suspect the creators just wanted to showboat like "Hey look, we went on a field trip to make this film!" The acting performances are decent, especially from beauties Corri English and Sandra McCoy, but it's hardly their fault that the characters are too bland and annoying to be memorable. Fans of gory killings and macabre imagery will be tremendously disappointed, as "House of Fears" is the type of horror that wouldn't even upset 12-year-old Hannah Montana fans.

Not to bad

[cmpyper · 4/10 · 4 February 2012]

Being a fan of the horror movie genre after watching this movie I have to say it is one of the better low budget horror films. The acting is far from Oscar winning performance's but the actors do hold true to their characters. Has a pretty solid story and a well written script.The one thing I really enjoyed about this film is the way it tackles each characters individual fear such as clowns, suffocation, Ghosts etc. It also offers a few creepy twists and turns along the way. To sum it all up don't watch this movie with high expectations or you WILL be disappointed I recommend this movie to any hardcore horror fan especially fans of the low budget type slasher films just don't expect an Alfred Hitchcock or Wes Craven type flick.

the only thing we have to fear is... a bad horror movie

[FieCrier · 3/10 · 21 November 2010]

A relatively tame film about teenagers who sneak into a common fear-themed haunted house attraction before it's due to open, where their fears actually can come to life and kill them because of an evil statuette. Possibly the lack of violent or sexual content was due to the movie being shot in the very Mormon state of Utah?

The things they're afraid of are not very focused, in that they don't just attack or kill the person who has the fear, but go after everybody. Some people get injured or killed by things that as far as we know, nobody was afraid of. It's a little weird that way. In the advertising for the film I'd read, there was mention of "sinister clowns, killer scarecrows." There's really only one of each and the clown barely gets any screen time at all.

The characters aren't particularly interesting. The women are pretty, while the guys are somewhat goofy-looking. Corri English's Samantha is a little more developed by virtue of some backstory accompanied by flashbacks which are fairly well-done.

Cydney Neil, former owner and operator of the Rocky Point Haunted House in Salt Lake City briefly appears as herself. A shame more use wasn't made of her.

The director is listed as the producer for an upcoming film titled Hell House, which oddly appears to have the same plot.

A good horror film...

[MovieGuy01 · 5/10 · 10 October 2009]

I enjoyed watching House Of Fears and found it to be a good film. It starts. The night before a local haunted house opens for Halloween, six friends break in for a evening of fun. Soon after entering, the house they find themselves trapped inside with no way out. They try and find a way to get themselves out but they find that every escape is blocked, They are unable to tell between what is real and what is not. They find out that their worst nightmare has come a they get deeper into trouble as they lose where each of the friends are. They must help each other to find a way out. This film ended up being very good, and i much better film that i though it was going to be.

Meh - Missed Opportunity

[gregsrants · 6/10 · 1 August 2011]

When an ancient evil relic is found and brought to an American haunted house, you just know bad things are going to happen. Such is the basis for Ryan Little's House of Fears, a horror film that starts out exceeding every expectation only to fall into general horror clichés and generic devices.

The relic, as it is explained, will tap inside the minds of its victims and prey upon their deepest nightmares. So when a group of six friends sneak into the haunted house exhibit a night before the official launch, well, to quote Drowning Pool – "Let the bodies hit the floor!" In perfect horror symmetry, the group of friends consist of three boys and three girls. Two of the girls are half sisters (Corri English and Sandra McCoy) who don't exactly get along. Their relationship is further strained by a male interest (Corey Sevier) who is quasi-seeing one sister, but is willing to give the other one a go. All of this is intended to develop a back story to assist with our attachment to the characters, but in truth, it's just padding to help get the running time up to an 86-minute feature.

After the introduction of the fated six (Alice Greczyn, Eliot Benjamin and Michael J. Pagan round out the cast) we watch as each of them reveal their innermost fear and further observe as their nightmares come to life in the forms of killer clowns (not from outer space, unfortunately), a scarecrow and fears of suffocating and claustrophobia. All their fears are realized inside the already spooky haunted/funhouse which adds quite a bit to the atmosphere of the film.

The script, penned by Stephen A. Lee and John Lyde, is a good idea which falls prey to tired technique. Thoughts of Wishmaster and Waxwork ran through our head in some of the film's better scenes. The Scarecrow and the tall, bald demon character were particularly unnerving and used very effectively in promoting an aura of fear.

But the actions of the characters were just too dumb to keep the momentum built up in any of the action sequences. The six make the usual dumb horror film moves such as splitting up, fighting amongst themselves, shaking when trying to load a gun at an opportune moment and talking about not being able to leave a dead friend behind before trying to save their own skin. Yawn.

We couldn't help but think that just a little help from smarter written characters would have propelled House of Fears into the horror geekdom mainstream. After all, we did jump. We did think the nightmare in the form of the demon, the clown and the scarecrow were scary. And we did think the idea of a funhouse being the setting was a device not used often enough in horror.

But instead of making House of Fears a must-see, it falls into the 'meh – it's alright' category. Which is a shame really.

www.killerreviews.com

Kids in a Haunted House -- Pretty Standard Story

[gavin6942 · 5/10 · 10 October 2012]

Six friends sneak into a haunted house the night before it opens for Halloween, only to find that their evening of fun has turned into their worst nightmare.

Corri English (playing Samantha) may now be known to horror fans who watch "Holliston" (if you do not watch it, you should), but she was largely unknown when appearing here in a starring role. On the flip side, Jared Padalecki (as "JP") was probably well-known at this point and appears anonymously (uncredited). How they got Padalecki is unclear.

The film has an interesting style and coloration (sort of a purposely blurry, washed-out look). And a haunted houses where the fears come to life is always a steady source of horror goodness. But I just did not see much to make this one stand out, and it has been understandably forgotten.

Skillful girls and clumsy demons.

[fedor8 · 25 April 2009]

"What are your fears?" I'm afraid of getting hit where it hurts most, I'm afraid of Alan Derschowitz defending serial-killers, I'm terrified of Obama getting re-elected, and I have justified fears that very soon Chavez will become the "voice of reason" in an increasingly retarded world. But my greatest fear is that the next 5000 horror films are all going to be about teenagers.

What is it with those demons and monsters lately? What's with their recent obsession with killing teens? Why aren't we 30somethings worth slaughtering anymore? The set-up for this trite horror flick is about as unique as it gets: six teenagers enter a building (not a house) and get wiped off one by one. Nothing wrong with that... But if you're going to stretch this non-plot into 80 minutes, then you've got to provide us with more teenagers. Only four get killed, plus the guard, and that makes five. 80 minutes divided by 5 corpses = 16 minutes.

That's only one killing per every 16 minutes! Far too little. What happens in those average 16 minutes, between killings? Nothing.

Take "The Shining" (Kubrick's excellent version, of course, not Stephen King's recent abomination). That movie lasts 135 minutes and has only two deaths (one of them being in the very last scene). When you have a good story, a stellar cast, and a master-director, you can get away with a murder per 67.5 minutes, easily. In HOF you've got none of those necessary requirements.

Hence: the number of deaths in a horror movie - necessary to keep the viewer interested - is inversely proportional to the quality of the director and the material. From this we draw the obvious conclusion that because HOF's director and his material are crap, we need far more dead teens. 50, perhaps...? 100?... Let's settle with 239, it's a nice round number. 239 teens enter the house and get slaughtered one by one. 239 divided by 80 = 2.98. Nearly THREE dead teens per minute! Now, that would make HOF far more watchable.

This impressive, hypothetical death-rate wouldn't turn HOF into a classic, but it would make it so much more watchable. Plus, it would make us respect those rather incompetent HOF monsters a lot more: all they managed to achieve, the lazy slobs, was to kill 5 out of the 7 teens. Two GIRLS managed to run away from them. One of them never even held a weapon in her hand, and yet she managed to fight off a demon repeatedly.

And then they want a sequel? Those monsters need to get in shape before they even begin to deserve another movie. I suggest a fitness program to improve their running and coordination, and heavier drugs to stimulate more aggression. Lumbering fools...

Speaking of which... Do NOT miss the AMAZING extra-scene epilogue after the end-credits! It will scare you like a... like a... a pair of soft pink slippers.

And of course the mobile phones don't work...

"Hello, 911! We're trapped in a house of fears and already 3 people have died!" Well, 4 actually, Samantha.

Filmed In Utah. I think they ought to stick to salty lakes, basketball, and silly religions...

Come ON! House of Fears was great!

[neerdowell · 10/10 · 4 March 2010]

I don't know what movie some of the previous reviewers were watching, or exactly what standard they want to hold a horror movie to (Orwell???), but House of Fears was a great movie! Let me throw in my one caveat: FOR WHAT IT WAS. We're talking about a low budget horror film that was made with no well-known talent at the time. Expecting to see Oscar-worthy material is just being dense. But there was a lot to like about this movie.

First, are there really that many original stories left for horror movie setups? No, so what you do is take a known plot line and try to throw some originality in how you present it. You've got a basic haunted house story here, but they mix things up with the characters - two step-sisters who hate each other but who enter the haunted house together when one begs the other not to ruin the night for her. Will they bond together to survive, or will their hatred lead one to abandon the other? Also, instead of a maniac doing all the killing, it's an ancient artifact that is causing things to come to life. It finds out your worst fear and then kills you with it. (Or tries to.) Again, not original but when you put the two things together it works out nicely.

The comment about the lack of gore was also an absurd one. This movie does not bill itself as a slasher flick. I really enjoyed the fact that there is suspense and setup before each killing. And really - you'd have to have 40 teenagers sneaking into the haunted house to satisfy the blood lust of some of these so-called horror fans! Talk about an unrealistic setup! I've seen a lot of low to mid-budget films that were flat-out unwatchable. You turn them off after 15 minutes and berate yourself for wasting the money and the 15 minutes. Not only is House of Fears watchable, it's a darn good movie! And the lesser-known talent in this movie is now becoming much more recognizable. They've gone on to supporting roles in other films and TV. You'll enjoy watching House of Fears and remembering years later that some of tomorrow's well-known actors were in it.

Honestly....

[SherryHKuhn · 7/10 · 23 September 2018]

Not a bad movie at all! Yeah some things were predictable but seriously what horror movie isn't! Just watch it for what it is and stop comparing it to other movies...you'll enjoy it more!

Another forgettable DTV horror film.

[poolandrews · 4/10 · 21 December 2009]

House of Fears starts in a region of Africa where a archaeological dig has uncovered some artifacts including a little statue that is possessed by an evil god, an evil god that know's peoples fears & turns them into reality in order to kill that person. Jump to Salem in Oregon in the US where stepsisters Samantha (Corri English) & Hailey (Sandra McCoy) are enjoying a party at a friends house when Zane (Eliot Benjamin) suggest they & a few other select friends visit the soon to open House of Fears attraction where he is the tour guide & as such has a set of keys to enjoy a sneak peek before it opens to the general public. Once there the group quickly find out that the House of Fears is divided into nine separate sections with each one covering a common fear from suffocation to knives to spiders. It just so happens that the little possessed statue is also there for decoration & the teen friends soon find themselves being killed by their worst fears which become reality...

Executive produced & directed by Ryan Little this fairly tame teen slasher has a decent enough idea behind it & has pretty good production values but ultimately it never delivers on it's promise & it just ends up being another faceless low budget horror film the likes of which clutter video shop shelves & fill bargain bins right across the world. The usual problems plague House of Fears, a shallow script that has an OK concept but never builds on it as dumb teen character's wander around a lot, stop to talk about how they shouldn't stop (I'm not joking) & eventually split up so they can get killed off. All of them are walking clichés, there's the token black guy, the prankster, the slut, the 'good' girl & a bratty spoilt one along with a all American white teen hero. Then there's that concept about this demon god thing turning peoples fears into reality to kill them, there could have been some great sequences built around this with all sorts of possibilities as & there could have been some psychological depth here to as character's have to face up to their greatest fear & overcome it but instead we just get a killer scarecrow & an undertaker who just turn out to be the Freddy or Jason murderer character, there's very little imagination here & it's predictable too. The first half of the film has these six teens looking around this House of Fears after hours & this is probably the films highlight as several cheap but reasonable jump moments are shown & the locations & sets are surprisingly good but once the killing starts it's strictly teen slasher territory & not particularly good teen slasher territory either. This could have been pretty good but as it is it isn't.

The production values are surprisingly good with nice sets but the shot on video look cheapens it, I so wish filmmakers still used proper grainy film like they used to. House of Fears is very tame indeed, there's no real gore or violence in it, there are a few dead bodies seen with a bit of blood dribbling out of one's mouth, someone is electrocuted & that's about it. Although the film is supposed to be about peoples fears it's not scary in itself, simply not enough happens but there are one or two cheap horror film moments that do work to an extent but nothing groundbreaking or sustained. Although made in 2007 House of Fears was only released on DVD in the states at the end of 2009 & you can see why.

This looks alright to be fair to it but that's not really enough reason to see it. The acting isn't that good from anyone involved who were obviously cast for their looks rather than their thespian ability.

House of Fears is another low budget horror slasher that doesn't really distinguish itself from the crowd except that it's even tamer than most modern low budget horror & it had potential that it didn't live up to. There are better ways to spend both your time & money.

Generic movie that is badly acted and poorly directed.

[eferhild2010 · 1/10 · 19 November 2010]

I couldn't even finish watching this movie. 10 minutes before the end I decided to quit wasting my time. The movie is poorly executed and badly acted. The scares if that's what you call them is not scary. The cut scenes for flash backs are OK but do nothing but supposedly ad value to the movie. There is absolutely no blood or gore in the movie and no nudity as well. Two redeeming factors of a budget horror movie that is denied to the viewer. Avoid at all costs even though it's on Netflix streaming in HD, hence the reason I even thought about watching at all. I expect a horror movie to be either or both scary/funny and include violence with hopefully nudity at least. This movie contains none of the above. I was not entertained at all and had to leave this movie even before it ended. I tried my best to enjoy it and I'm a horror fan for over 30 years. Please don't waste your time with this POS it's not worth it.

Are there any good horror films anymore?

[ang-volcom2003 · 1/10 · 1 November 2010]

I've seen some decent, gory sickening cringe worthy horror films. This was not one of them.

I never heard of this movie before seeing it last night on netflicks. Now sometimes, some movies skip over the theater release due to grapic scenes directors are unwilling to cut. And some skip the theater release due to being completely a waste of time. This movie was the later.

From the very beginning you know exactly what's going to happen. As soon as they enter the haunted house you know Zane will be the first to die. Side note: a movie involving a evil spirited African statue? From watching far to much scooby-doo the first thing i'd do is break that thing. problem solved. no death.

This movie is the exact same as all the rest. A group of teenaged, sex driven individuals, who think it would be a good idea to go to an unopened haunted house, with a security guard MIA, seeing creepy things.

Spoiler

the ending? really? the only two that survive are the step sister who hate each other? yawn.

Nothing you gave not seen before (and better)

[stalkingwolf83 · 3/10 · 3 December 2009]

I rented this movie simply because I did not have many other choices. I did not expect it to be great, which is about correct.

It's just another simple teen slasher movie that we've seen a million times before. A bunch of good looking dumb cliché teens break into a house only to get killed.....very original. Especially funny is how the makers put in some silly background story about some African statue.Very silly and completely obvious that is was put in just for the sake of having a "story".

Skip this folks, it adds nothing to the already dying horror genre. For a good and original horror movie look elsewhere.

Lactose-free "Dark House"

[BakuryuuTyranno · 5/10 · 21 January 2011]

Haunted house films aren't too common anymore, and unfortunately, some don't handle the concept well.

People in a haunted house doubling as a fake haunted house get terrorized by various apparitions, pretty similar to the Fangoria horror festival's "Dark House" but without the cheese.

The problem? When a horror movie isn't scary, I'd prefer watching a cheesy film over one that leaves me thinking, "okay, that guy died, meaning after this character, this one, and this one die it'll be time for protagonists to defeat (insert villain here)".

Dark House was very fun; House of Fears was memorable despite not being good, but I must admit because I've recently seen Dark House, this movie seemed less entertaining than before, and it wasn't all that entertaining to begin with.

Maybe worth a rental, otherwise, watch some other film.

An Ok Film with an Amazing Set

[DuskShadow · 5/10 · 1 March 2023]

It sucks that imdb forces people to have to use 600 characters these days, despite the fact that some reviewers can leave a single sentence and their review is allowed to be posted. Maybe they pay for some premium membership, I cannot say.

But aside from my complaint about that, which in a way is helping me to satisfy the vapid IMDB need for 600 character reviews, as I stated in the title : THE MOVIE was JUST ok at times, but the set stole the show. It wasnt anything truly spectacular. It was just extensive. Either they shot in a number of locales or in one big studio lot. Or maybe they went to actual funhouses. They pulled a lot of strings and the quality of the film with its lighting and all was fairly good. It was just missing something to make it more palpable, including better acting. 5/10.

Seriously dont even try it

[gressman07 · 3/10 · 10 October 2019]

Its Halloween which means 31 days of Halloween themed movies for my annual tradition. Been using Tubi or Vudu free for most. Hard to pass on free movies and the trailer for this I guess looked competent enough to sell me. The concept and Scarecrow mask mostly sold me as I figured I could play some mental goofs with this being some DC (Batman) Scarecrow Origin tale of his testing some new fear toxin.

This movie is bad. Not so bad it's good. Bad. Dry bad. No humor, no script, no effects, no scares, nothing. Some cheese could have saved this but it is entirely dry. And bad. There are no redeeming qualities. It is an entirely boring, bland movie not worth your time. The introduction and premise hold initial promise but things quickly devolve into people walking room to room, sometimes dying, often in literal fisticuffs with Mr Scarecrow.

If the movie had a budget, it doesn't show. Perhaps a larger budget could have made something, but there seems a larger laziness or lack of talent involved given first time directors have made great things with inventive techniques, ideas, etc. It seems they are contend here to simply make a movie. By the end it is simply going through the motions, and I have not since the Cloverfield Paradox been more thankful for the credits to roll. I now know my greatest fear at least. The idea of ever watching this hot trash ever again.

Initial 2/10 felt overharsh, so 3/10. For context, a new record low for me (5 often default, lowest prior was 4 to Cloverfield Paradox)

Good movie that targets your fears

[sparklepunk312 · 9/10 · 30 December 2010]

House of Fears appeared to be just another lame excuse for a movie about teens being stupid and getting killed. I'm only 16 but scary movies don't scare me, I love them. But this movie had me hiding my face a few times. It's not like other scary movies at all, not only does it target your fears but it plays around with them. It's not like a full on fear thing, it teases you with your fears, doesn't full on throw them at you, which makes it even scarier for me. The six teens at the beginning who sneak into a haunted house the day before it opens, admit to their biggest fears to the guy who works at the haunted house, who is one of the friends. They start through the house laughing at that funny guy. All of their fears is what ends up killing them. One is afraid of clowns, a clown gets him, one is afraid of suffocating to death, she gets suffocated in sand. I really do love this movie just for all the intensity and fear it has in it. Although some of the acting could be better and sound effects could be more believable, I would recommend this movie to anyone who really loves scary movies like I do and is just looking for something to actually be scared of. 4.5/5 starts (:

Padalecki Sighting!

[wandernn1-81-683274 · 4/10 · 6 May 2020]

Okay +1 Star for the Padalecki sighting at the beginning of the film. I said hey wait a minute was that.... and then I was like nah that wasn't him. Since he was never seen again. But it turns out it was him!

Okay so this is one of those Hey lets take the friends on the tour of the Haunted House movies and it's really not that great. Nothing really special about it. Not very scary. Not really any witty dialogue. Really the only thing saving it from a gutter score is the Padalecki sighting.

A Premise That Is Intriguing But Incredibly Dumb At The Same Time

[Theo Robertson · 4/10 · 5 January 2010]

When I heard the title I was immediately of Orwell's 1984 or more specifically Room 101 where the enemies of the state are conditioned to conformity by torture involving their greatest fear . There is no reason to believe a low budget horror film has been inspired by a literary giant like Orwell so I won't sully his memory by mentioning him anymore

But still there is something of Room 101 to this story . A bunch of teens break in to a haunted house attraction and then strange things start happening like being killed by the horror attractions . It's at this point you'll start believing the attractions such as mummy's and scarecrows are in fact the work of a maniac dressed up as a mummy etc , but no the creatures are in fact real creatures brought to life by a spirit from Africa

It's a crazy notion and one that you find yourself rubbing your chin about . It's incredibly fascinating but one that is laughably daft at the same time and the more you think about the less fascinating it becomes and instead becomes more and more daft . There are a few atmospheric moments but hardcore horror fans will disappointed by the lack of gore

teenage horror

[trashgang · 4/10 · 24 March 2015]

What can I say about this typical teenage horror, a rather boring flick with nothing special, except towards the end the horror really comes in but for the geeks it will still be too low to call it a decent flick.

There's no gore and the acting was sometimes laughable. The things walking around may be frightening for teenagers but again, nothing special and the CGI for the dog's eyes didn't work neither.

In fact, eleven or younger will be scared in places but for me, just a boring flick. And to say if it would contain the red stuff that it could have been a mediocre horror.

Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 0/5 Story 1/5 Comedy 0/5

Oh Dear...

[bangel3322 · 2/10 · 27 July 2020]

Good story completely anhilated by bad acting and even worse writing. I know the events would never happen in real life, but the dialogue is cringeworthy....I mean people just don't speak and behave this way under duress. Anyways 1 star for storyline and another star for the Jared Padalecki cameo from when he used to date Sandra McCoy.