Definetely see improvements

I am not a filmmaker, just a film watcher. I do not watch loads of horror movies, but have seen more than usual lately because one of my friends is a horror movie freak. I'll have to make him watch this!

I know the first Ghostwatcher movie as the director's first effort at something of this magnitude, and I enjoyed it. I just wanted to give some constructive praise and criticism, rather than the general cr*p that's being spouted about the movie. And I'll also note that I watched it for the first time yesterday, so my opinions could be inaccurate and subject to change. And, of course, these are all simply one person's opinion.

My big point of criticism first, to get it out of the way. My biggest problem when watching the film is that it is too easy for me to be removed from much of the, well, horror of it. I will not squibble over how much is acting vs. directing decision-making, but... This was true (to me) of the first Ghostwatcher as well. The lead characters never seem terrified enough. In the sequel, there was not enough terror or emotion from the lead when losing either parent. Some of the best scenes of the best horror movies deal with the emotional break-down of the character, allowing the audience to see someone pushed against their biggest fears. I would say, next time, encourage or allow your actors to really freak out and scream and cry. Perhaps you tried this and it didn't feel right, I honestly don't know. I will say that, after the long and quiet moment where the lead watches her father die, her breakdown over his body was pretty good, and closer to (for me) a believable reaction. Now, having said all that, if there were conscious reasons and decisions for having the lead react in the way she did, it was not obvious to me as an audience.

Okay, that's the big thing that bugs me throughout the movie. As for the good:

The sound quality is MUCH better. The soundtrack was good. The editing was good. The makeup and special effects were good. It is evident that there was more money to work with here. I will add that the acting was better, as well, though I don't know how much of that was from the director's learning to work with actors better or better preparation time for the actors, etc. I DO know that the cast from both Ghostwatcher movies have some excellent actors in it.

The writing was better. I beleived in the characters more, and there seemed to be better character development. I also say this because in the first film, when the character, having been in the trunk of a car, is able to find her way to a random house in the middle of nowhere based on turns... that was not a beleiveable explanation and seemed conveniently and unimaginatively written in to allow a quick link between two scenes. At this moment, I don't remember seeing anything that made me sit back and say "yeah right, lazy writing" (of course, I'm allowing for certain things based on the genre).

The best thing going in both movies--and I see it in both, and perhaps a more skilled use of it in the sequel--is the use of stillness and time for suspense. In the second film, the moment where Laura is told to look behind her, and there is a shot of the camera moving slowly toward the door behind her, was truly creepy to me. The creepiest moment in the movie for me, I think. And it took it's time. Very well done.

That's all I have to offer for the moment. Good work here.