Not surprisingly at all, this low-budget film is pretty cheesy. The whole production is average at best, but it's not completely bad. The story is pretty played out, the effects are subpar, and the acting isn't going to win any awards. That being said, it is apparent the cast and crew actually tried to do the best with what they had to work with and overall it is watchable. I'm saying that it's good, but movies like this are usually only worth a 2 star rating but this one is worth a watch if you feel like turning your mind off for a little bit and enjoying some cheesiness. 4/10
13 Reviews
VIEWS ON FILM review of A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return
burlesonjesse52 July 2019
Warning: Spoilers
"Just like Ghostbusters". No, not at all. Not just like Ghostbusters. Ghostbusters had a known cast, fresh comedic dialogue, production values, and box office sway. A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return (my latest review) is more akin to a fanboy, student film version of The Ring.
Anyhow, have you ever seen a movie where the budget constraints are so abundant the pseudo-Hitchcockian scenes are cut off at midpoint? And have you ever seen a flick where the musical score is the same two chords used in countless scare fests via the last twenty years? A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return is that movie and it's a sequel that needs to be "returned" to your local Redbox stat!
"Return", with its E-list stars, its community theater acting, its wink wink to all things VOD, and its massively cheapo special effects, is a continuation of 2013's A Haunting at Silver Falls. Devoid of any suitable jump scares, any jim-jams, and lacking anything resembling the conch of capable editing, "Return" is only frightening if you've never seen an actual horror film before. Yeah there's a couple of twin ghosts in "Return" that are clearly inspired by the siblings in The Shining. Still, they aren't nearly as creepy as those pale-edged girls from Stanley Kubrick's 1980 hit.
Shot in Oregon (which sort of looks like rural Europe) and directed by a cut corners rookie (Teo Konuralp), A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return has to do with a phantom aunt who uses the body of a ruthless convict to terrorize a bunch of young twentysomethings.
Look for characters saying the most cliched of fright night readings ("we've gotta get outta here" or "if we're gonna survive, it's now or never"). Also, know that "Return" is probably the most restrained, PG-13-style horror pic you'll ever take in. Its non-theatrical release can be put alongside any recent Amityville-franchised endeavor. Bottom line: "Return" is hardcore "downturn". My rating: 1 star.
Anyhow, have you ever seen a movie where the budget constraints are so abundant the pseudo-Hitchcockian scenes are cut off at midpoint? And have you ever seen a flick where the musical score is the same two chords used in countless scare fests via the last twenty years? A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return is that movie and it's a sequel that needs to be "returned" to your local Redbox stat!
"Return", with its E-list stars, its community theater acting, its wink wink to all things VOD, and its massively cheapo special effects, is a continuation of 2013's A Haunting at Silver Falls. Devoid of any suitable jump scares, any jim-jams, and lacking anything resembling the conch of capable editing, "Return" is only frightening if you've never seen an actual horror film before. Yeah there's a couple of twin ghosts in "Return" that are clearly inspired by the siblings in The Shining. Still, they aren't nearly as creepy as those pale-edged girls from Stanley Kubrick's 1980 hit.
Shot in Oregon (which sort of looks like rural Europe) and directed by a cut corners rookie (Teo Konuralp), A Haunting at Silver Falls: The Return has to do with a phantom aunt who uses the body of a ruthless convict to terrorize a bunch of young twentysomethings.
Look for characters saying the most cliched of fright night readings ("we've gotta get outta here" or "if we're gonna survive, it's now or never"). Also, know that "Return" is probably the most restrained, PG-13-style horror pic you'll ever take in. Its non-theatrical release can be put alongside any recent Amityville-franchised endeavor. Bottom line: "Return" is hardcore "downturn". My rating: 1 star.
The only thing scary about this film is the acting
hopevtaylor11 November 2019
What not to do as an actor, 101.
Too bad the budget and special effects were decent and that the story line had promise.
Wasted on failed character development and even the occasional inability to complete a sentence without a dramatic pause.
Too bad the budget and special effects were decent and that the story line had promise.
Wasted on failed character development and even the occasional inability to complete a sentence without a dramatic pause.
UNBEARABLY STUPID DO NOT WATCH THIS GARBAGE
melodydetrick1 July 2019
It isn't scary, the dialogue is so dumb it's almost funny, and the special effects are non existent. The director really made the trailer look decent and I'm a fool for having spent money to watch this trash. This "spirit" hides in a corner and tries creeping out like a human actor.. I just can't. Please save yourself the time and skip this one. Oh and the plot makes NO logical sense.
Would've been better if there was any backstory/more plot, but was O.K. for light entertainment.
connorundrumme2 October 2019
It felt exactly like made-for-tv and for younger teens. It started out w/ a few things that are awful: overplucked shiny eyebrows, Uggs, & cheap sweaters. Gah. The scene lighting is also very, very dark at times.
I did like the character of Trevor, the long-haired unintelligent-seeming-but-likeable guy (Aussie Harry Hains), and it was on the refreshing side to have a middle-aged mom be pretty involved along the way, without getting mocked or sidelined immediately. Also, her hair always looked well-coiffed. :D
Sometimes the acting (aaaand direction) wasn't the greatest, but at least the characters weren't made fully unpleasant for drama's sake. Except the cop, he was No. Fun.
The writing isn't so hot, either: "She can see the occult." Weird phrasing. This occult, that occult, the other occult over there? "Institute patients" gets called crazy, waaay too many times. How low brow and sh!tty. }:( There's too much repetition and exposition of pretty basic ideas, and little payoff as far as horror goes.
I did like the character of Trevor, the long-haired unintelligent-seeming-but-likeable guy (Aussie Harry Hains), and it was on the refreshing side to have a middle-aged mom be pretty involved along the way, without getting mocked or sidelined immediately. Also, her hair always looked well-coiffed. :D
Sometimes the acting (aaaand direction) wasn't the greatest, but at least the characters weren't made fully unpleasant for drama's sake. Except the cop, he was No. Fun.
The writing isn't so hot, either: "She can see the occult." Weird phrasing. This occult, that occult, the other occult over there? "Institute patients" gets called crazy, waaay too many times. How low brow and sh!tty. }:( There's too much repetition and exposition of pretty basic ideas, and little payoff as far as horror goes.
Omg completely awful.
blisa-5239622 September 2019
Sad, yet still okay
hannahelizabeth-8530121 September 2019
The CGI was terrible compared to the original, and without the right Jordan, Larry just wasn't the same. No offense to Laura, she did pretty great, this is just a role for Alix, and without her everyone's portrayals seemed lacking. As a fan of AHaSF, this plot line was mediocre at best, and I was really looking forward to it... but mediocre is the best I can give it.
Acting?
inmentemdiaboli10 September 2020
Terrible
royeighmey15 January 2020
Weak plot, bad acting, no tension
scheherezhad26 September 2019
At no point in this movie did I ever feel a single shred of tension. Everything was so poorly written that any potential scares were telegraphed far ahead of time, and the characters were so flat and paper-thin I had no investment in a single one of them. I actually kind of forgot it was on because I was doing other things while it played.
Just like Ghostbusters
nogodnomasters24 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
There is no recap of the first film. It picks up years later with Jordon, the main character (Laura Flannery ) played by a different person. Jordon is away at school and sleeps fully clothed with Leisure Suit Larry Parrish (James Cavlo) while her roommate Zoe (Clemmie Dugdale) watches and Trevor (Harry Hains) who listens outside the door being the creepy one.
Anne, the unfriendly ghost has returned. Larry gets kidnapped as a way to get to Jordan who comes with her entourage.
The writing and acting went downhill and off a cliff from the first film.
Guide: No sex or nudity. No swearing that I recall. It was filmed in Salem. . . Oregon.
Anne, the unfriendly ghost has returned. Larry gets kidnapped as a way to get to Jordan who comes with her entourage.
The writing and acting went downhill and off a cliff from the first film.
Guide: No sex or nudity. No swearing that I recall. It was filmed in Salem. . . Oregon.
Almost as good as the first Almost!!!
donaldwaynestephens29 June 2023
In this Sequel we have a continuation from the original "A Haunting at Silver Falls" though I feel if all original cast could have returned then it would have been better but I maybe wrong this film had a great story to it and had as good a plot if not a better one. There is much going on and I feel that there is a possibility for a third installment but we will have to wait and see. So if I have to speak on my review on a simple statement I would say actors did good playing off one another and the added characters front he first filled in the void for those that they didn't have in this one and the way they still keep the bond that was made in first alive in the second one I felt added a little more to the story so well done once again would have give a 10/10 but did not have the original cast return so had to dock on that sorry. But as alway you watch it and let us know your thoughts.
Strangely watchable nonsense.
el716 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not even going to pretend this movie is good for the sake of a 'so bad it's great' rating. It's not good. It is watchable, though. This is a sequel to A Haunting at Silver Falls which is a TV movie from 2013. I did see that movie a number of years back, and I don't remember it well, but I remember enough about it that I know it was better than this movie is. Not a whole lot better, but enough so that I decided 'what the hell' and watched the sequel.
Laura Flannery has replaced Alix Elizabeth Glitter as Jordan, the teen who (spoilers if you haven't seen part 1) survived her aunt's murderous ghost-causing rampage in the last flick. Jordan is now in college and still dating Larry (who is still played by James Cavlo) while sharing a dorm with cool girl Zoe. The friends, which also include a sweet guy named Trevor who is smitten with Zoe, actually have some of the most entertaining bits in the movie as they banter among one another. But this isn't the story of how Jordan went to college. This is the story about how her aunt comes back as a ghost for revenge and somehow the twins are back as well, even though that part is not well explained.
Also not well explained: who gave Larry's psychiatrist mom Dr. Parrish enough funding to turn the old high school into an institute to house mentally unstable psychics with the help of only one overworked psychiatric nurse and one barely competent security guard? Why does it look like the sign for her institute is written on a chalk board? Who on God's green Earth allowed her to house a criminally insane psychic in that institute, and why did she think this was a good idea? Who was taking care of her patients while she was on the run hiding from a ghost and a lunatic for a couple days? Why did the sheriff's office only seem to have one short strand of caution tape from Party City? Why did the sheriff, who up 'til the final minutes of the movie display the only common sense in this entire thing, decide at the last minute to let a bunch of witnesses leave his crime scene with such a goofy line?
Those are just a few things that were not explained and I remain curious about. Also, the lunatic is really the only consistently scary part of the movie.
Laura Flannery has replaced Alix Elizabeth Glitter as Jordan, the teen who (spoilers if you haven't seen part 1) survived her aunt's murderous ghost-causing rampage in the last flick. Jordan is now in college and still dating Larry (who is still played by James Cavlo) while sharing a dorm with cool girl Zoe. The friends, which also include a sweet guy named Trevor who is smitten with Zoe, actually have some of the most entertaining bits in the movie as they banter among one another. But this isn't the story of how Jordan went to college. This is the story about how her aunt comes back as a ghost for revenge and somehow the twins are back as well, even though that part is not well explained.
Also not well explained: who gave Larry's psychiatrist mom Dr. Parrish enough funding to turn the old high school into an institute to house mentally unstable psychics with the help of only one overworked psychiatric nurse and one barely competent security guard? Why does it look like the sign for her institute is written on a chalk board? Who on God's green Earth allowed her to house a criminally insane psychic in that institute, and why did she think this was a good idea? Who was taking care of her patients while she was on the run hiding from a ghost and a lunatic for a couple days? Why did the sheriff's office only seem to have one short strand of caution tape from Party City? Why did the sheriff, who up 'til the final minutes of the movie display the only common sense in this entire thing, decide at the last minute to let a bunch of witnesses leave his crime scene with such a goofy line?
Those are just a few things that were not explained and I remain curious about. Also, the lunatic is really the only consistently scary part of the movie.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
