The fact that everyone is in on these sightings takes away the scare factor. We also learn about it from the ghost sitings that Lisa (Spencer), her sister Joyce (Katee Sackhoff), and Lisa's little girl, Heidi, all share. This house used to be owned by a stationmaster for the Underground Railroad and we learn this story from a preacher and strangers stopping by throughout the film. The mom, played by Abigail Spencer, may or may not have lived in this lonely little cabin as a little girl (they never really cover that topic very well). We're presented a family that is moving to Georgia. Non-film ranting aside, "Ghosts of Georgia" feels like a straight-to-DVD release, with average to bad graphics and some of the worst acting even in horror film standards. What a contradictory and completely laughable title for the film right off the bat. Having seen a slate from the production of this film, it was originally titled, "The Haunting in Georgia", but for some reason, it became a sequel to the 2009 horror film, "The Haunting In Connecticut", even though a) it has absolutely no connection to the original besides touting a based on a true story precursor like the previous film and b) THE FILM IS IN GEORGIA, NOT CONNECTICUT. It is a bad movie, but it's not gonna make you pull your hair out. The film has some interesting visual elements, but they're simply not enough to save this film. It doesn't add a layer of heartbreak to the story.
It doesn't backfire in this movie, but it doesn't really add anything to the movie. And not to mention, the potentially dangerous use of slavery. It just doesn't really do much anything of note and it's a bad film because it offers nothing new, because the acting is lackluster and because the scares just aren't thought out. The film doesn't get one star because it's offensively bad, nothing of the sort actually. If you don't have a problem with watching a film you've seen done to death, then by all means, you could do much worse. Creepy visions that only reveal part of the story, silly jump scares, etc., etc. There's the stereotypical blind lady that sees more than people with vision. It's just one that is incredibly lazy and uninspired and it very clearly relies on horror cliches. To be perfectly honest with you, this really isn't that bad of a movie, despite the rating. So things definitely start things off on the wrong foot and it doesn't get much better from there. To be honest, it really has nothing to do with the first one, and not that this is a problem since most DTV horror sequels are like this. It's clear that this was just a generic horror script and to give it a "chance" at finding an audience, they slap on the name of a successful horror film in order to fool people. This film has a really stupid title, considering where the film is actually set. In fact, this is lazy filmmaking, and the filmmakers clearly can't make something to really capture the viewer's interest, and the filmmakers rely too much on predictability and old ideas that makes this film pretty bad. This follow up is just boring and uninteresting, if you've seen the original, then skip this one as it never is anything truly engaging or memorable for that matter. I really don't know why they made a follow up, it was unnecessary as the first film was forgettable. The film is just garbage, the sheer lack of creativity is apparent throughout, and overall it's a prime example of how not to make a horror sequel. Don't go into this film expecting anything great, it's a waste of time. Like Its predecessor, this film just doesn't have the goods to really be a great horror film. This film is awful, and it is a lacking film in terms of horror material, and it just threads old ideas that we've seen many times before. There is no effort put into this film, and it's a shame because like the first one, this film had the opportunity of being a very good film, instead it wastes its potential on cheap scares that don't work whatsoever. The film lacks depth, and the scares are nonexistent. This is a forgettable film, one that has a poor cast of actors that really don't have any screen presence and seem bored in their parts.
The ideas here are strained, and it's just another one of those films that was made to make more money, without any concern of creating something truly terrifying and atmospheric. Sequel to The Haunting in Connecticut is yet another unimpressive, bland sequel that doesn't add anything new to the first film.