SteinMo What a freaking movie. So many twists and turns. Absolutely intense from start to finish.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

shmarie This movie is actually titled "Hotel Hell"- which doesn't make much sense. I am confused as to why it takes place at a hotel when none of the stories have anything to do with that hotel in which he hires a videographer to tour with him. I liked the twist at the end, but I am so confused as I really thought that when he was discussing the rooms that the 3 anthologies would actually be related to the hotel in some way shape or form...It was a solid campy B-movie horror flick, so please do not go into it assuming that it will have any deep meaning or be a work of art. I just enjoyed it for what it was and, if you decide to watch it, go into it with little to no expectations.

Nigel P Anthology films are somewhat scarce recently, although 'Little Deaths (2011)' and 'ABCs of Death (2012)' have been the more notable exceptions. And so to 'The Hotel', which features three stories within a framing narrative concerning paranormal investigator Eddie Osbourne staking a hotel with his new videographer. It's worth pointing out that this strand features the least effective moments in the film.The first tale concerns newlyweds Michael and Lana (Carson Nicely and Miranda Parham) moving into a house that appears to possess them. Nothing new in that, but it is played in engaging fashion by the two leads, and contains a few sinister moments before a weak ending. Retribution plays a part in the second piece, a Jason-like story about a bullied child dressing up as a clown and getting his own back on his childhood aggressors.An astonishingly dim film crew of three decide to record a hoax documentary concerning 'Bigfoot', and actually record themselves creating fake footprints in the foliage! A real life cannibal, played by Rodney Osborne takes advantage of the three youngsters' stupidity by eating them …… so it's no surprise to find that Eddie is himself a revealed to be a cannibal who has lured Will to the hotel in order to eat him – however, in a terrifically unexpected reveal, the killer clown from story two turns up for the finale. The message is that if you surround yourself with negative energy, it will soon consume you.This is good fun, obviously filmed on a micro-budget, and contains a vein of dark humour that makes up for any acting/production short-falls. The camera turns away from any gore, but there are some frightening moments – the shadow man from story one, the physically intimidating clown from story two, for example. There is an abundance of atmospheric from Director/writer Derrick Granado.

Dylan Templar Honestly this movie can only be described as truly terrible. The abomination of horror films is what lies within.I found myself laughing throughout the movie at the attempts to scare the audience. I Really do not recommend this movie, and genuinely believe you'd find your time be better spent watching paint dry.For a start, the acting wasn't particularly great. Admittedly some actors were better than others in this movie, but they were far and few between, and there was a lot to be desired. The poor cinematic techniques did not support the acting in anyway either. In some scenes, the shakiness of the camera, along with the shaky acting skills, made the movie feel rather amateurish. The lack of cinematic techniques and the inappropriate application of them, in my opinion, damaged any potential this movie had, where they may have been able to salvage it into a half decent movie if applied correctly. The story line was rather scattered. There were 3 separate stories that were supposed to connect to a central theme. The stories didn't seem to logically connect together. I appreciate that they were trying to create something that was different from typical and overdone movies in the genre, but the execution was poor. Just please don't waste your time on this movie.

nysalesman This movie starts really bad. Everything about the first scene (and subsequent set-up scenes for the anthology stories) is bad. It has the worst acting and the worst production values. It must have been shot on an iPhone, because my home video camera takes better quality video than these scenes. The poorly written dialog, along with the poor production values, makes it nearly unwatchable.I was about to give up on this movie after the first ten minutes. Then I remembered the other reviewers saying to stick it out. One even said that the bad acting and story was for a reason and it would all be clear by the end of the movie. So I stuck it out. I'm kind of glad that I did, because the first anthology story was actually pretty good and although the acting was still not that good, it was the best of the entire movie. Suffice it to say that the first story is sort of like the first paranormal activity film, but better and shorter. The second anthology story was decent, with the third being the least decent. Unlike the first scene and set-up scenes, the anthology stories actually had good production values.The entire movie, however, never explained why the first scene (and subsequent set-up scenes) had the worst writing, the worst quality, and the worst acting. I'm taking a leap here, but this movie came across to me like a very well made student project. If I were attending film school and watched this as a final grade project, then I would say it was great. Otherwise, as a commercial film, it is entertaining enough to rate 5 stars.