capie4 ...has already spoken for me. BUT I do have to note that the director didn't shake the camera to death and that allows the audience to absorb the set, acting and plot--something that is missing in modern movie director's education. Hitchcock shook the set when it was called for, not the camera. The audience looks the actors in their eyes just like in real life. It's hard to do when the camera won't stop being so orgasmic. This is a high compliment for such a bad production. Better luck with experience. Would someone tell me how many lines past "ten" will the guideline finally consider allowing this post to proceed? So, moving on. The (hotty) newscaster was the best actress of the lot. She should have starred.

bowmanblue Actually... it's more like 'Welcome to amateur hour (and twenty minutes).' This, incidentally, is about an hour and twenty minutes more than you'll probably feel is worth spending with this film.'The Haunting of Bates Hotel' has no actors that you've probably heard of. Yes, I know, many a great film has been made without stars. Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt alone doesn't guarantee a film's success. However, this one doesn't just not have stars; it also doesn't have actors. Seriously... these people's LACK of acting talent is almost amazing. I know it's a horror movie and so I wasn't expecting Oscar-worthy performances, but this is going to extremes. I really can't let the bad acting lie... it was like they just let anyone on set and allowed them to say the lines how they liked.The film is about a *supposedly* haunted house on some farmland in small-town America. Only it's not haunted and everyone knows that. The owners just put on some horror-themed events to bring in the money. However, a year after some girl gets horribly burned to death by 'accident,' more killings start to emerge.It's not all bad (most, but not all). The setting itself is quite a nice place for a slasher movie, i.e. a place where there are already *deliberately* plenty of gory props to confuse and startle the hapless victims. And there are some nice homages to existing horror icons, i.e. Freddy Krueger's jumper etc.But, the odd brief glimpse of Jason Vorhees' head-sack isn't enough to save this catastrophe of a film. It tries to be really funny. It fails. It falls flat on every attempt at humour and just comes across as cringe-worthy. Plus the gore isn't that good (yes, I know it's a cheap film, but I've seen student zombie films with better effects than this one) and, despite trying to be really post modern and self-knowing, it falls into every horror cliché going, i.e. 'have sex and die.' One word: avoid. If you've ever seen a horror film then it was better than this one. If, by some miracle you haven't ever seen a horror movie... then don't start with this one. If fact, just make your own horror flick with the video camera ap on your smartphone – guaranteed it'll be better than this!

caseyfnielsen I'm a lifelong horror fan, and there's a lot out there, especially streaming, that you can be spending your time watching. A lot of it is pretty horrible. I can assure you this one is not as horrible as those movies, and is a good time.Don't go into this wanting to take everything seriously. The Bates Haunting has more of a tone like the Hatchet movies - old school styled horror, can laugh at itself, and hits the ground running so you're never bored watching it. Kind of like Hobo with a Shotgun but not all "LOOK AT ME!!!" about everything.What's worse than a boring horror movie? Nothing. Even that, that you're thinking right now as you're reading it. Trust me, I've seen a lot of boring horror movies.I can go on and on about The Bates Haunting and why you should watch it, and in turn, bore you out of watching it. I'm not gonna do that! I can boil everything down into one line that will make or break you wanting to watch:TWO PEOPLE GET EATEN BY A COMBINE HARVESTER.If you can't appreciate that, what are you doing reading reviews about horror movies? Go play POGs with the neighbor kids or something instead. They still make those, right?

Joe This movie has nothing to do with the actual Bates Motel used in the original "Psycho". It's about the haunted attraction which is located in Pennsylvania. Furthermore, we have a movie mocking the original in a haunted attraction form.Acting was bad. Story wasn't anything special, but only kind of fun. Not scary at all. While it was entertaining enough to make it to the end, that's not saying much. I'd say only watch if your a die hard for anything Bates and interested in the attraction located in Pennsylvania. Almost seems like a movie made to gain recognition for the haunted attraction and also cashing in on the success of the recent "Bates Motel" show.