Sadly Over-hyped

good back-story, and good acting

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Why was this film ever made?To justify making a film, you need the following:1 a story 2 an idea of what you want to make of that story 3 a good director 4 actors 5 some sense as to WHY you want to show what you DO show1 serial killers make good stories for movies. There are hundreds of movies about the issue, some bad- some really good. 2 how can you justify showing torture and prolonged killing scenes? 3 what the film had a director? This looks like two torture porn interested guys made a home video, torturing women for fun 4 justify the side story (the investigation) having lousy actors? Shows all the more that the people behind this offensive tosh ONLY wanted to show torture and killing 5..Yeah.. do you really know?We are horror buffs and watch countless films at the weekends. We turned this one off, since there was nothing justifying us to watch the whole thing, since we like a good PLOT and good DIRECTION.in short: disgusting

This is a slow-burn creeper of a film focusing on two real-life serial killers, one of whom gets a co-starring role here as himself in flashback "found" footage. The story of House on the Hill is, well..... A woman recalls her days and nights with one of the killers as her tormenting lover, with digressions and flashbacks within flashbacks. The killers kill a succession of women and some of it gets very tedious. Creepy at times, somewhat effective for the most part but in terms of movie-making it's crude. There are a couple of gruesome moments but it's mostly about the processes they employ to kill. Even worse, the killers appear frustrated much of the time, and shows them playing a lot of chess; yet, neither of them seems very bright. The real-life killer appears at interludes, speaking to the viewer directly, with a chilling nonchalance that elevates the movie somewhat. The movie's bluntness creates suspense in some scenes. Most of the dread is created by the acting but there is no coherent story to support the effort. Things get monotonous but on balance it's not a total disappointment.

Why does everyone with a camera and a group of friends think they can make a movie? There are some truly great "based on a true story" flicks out there with good production actors and some adherence to the true story. This is made up fluff with nothing to really draw the viewer or hold attention. Don't waste your time on something which doesn't offer any real insight into the events which happened and the horror the real people endured. The actors portraying the victim seem to be no more bothered than someone whose flight is delayed, not truly desperate. Feel bad for the lead female who is really giving her best but is trapped in a bad movie. Would have been more engrossing to document this young actresses horror at being signed on to make a terrible movie than the horror they attempt to portray. Don't waste your time!

Are just some of the words I can say about this movie! others would be! Bone chilling, nerve shattering, terror trip into insanity, and make you disbelieve that you just seen what you have seen. This movie really did leave me feeling totally disturbed to my wick. Yes I know I gave it a 10* this is how I reached the rating, 64 % Direction, 10% sound track, 23% production & cinematography & 3% acting. so overall is a 10*.weather or not I would watch again? I think not! if disturbing movies that push all boundary's leaving you wanting to stay awake is your bag? then OK give the movie a go! If not avoid personally the movie should never have been made. But overall other than that I cant find fault in any level