Haven't seen this yet but if this is supposed to be set in Georgia then why did they use the Conneticut title? Doesn't make any sense, other then just trying to reap the rewards from the first one. Which wasn't too bad of a film. Why not just call it what it is A haunting in Georgia, or just name it something else entirely?
shareMaybe to get people talking about how bad the title is, therefore spreading the word about their film's existence by word of mouth? That's all I can think of. I'm sure if they called it The Haunting in Georgia, everyone would still get the message that it's supposed to be a sequel.
Come, fly the teeth of the wind. Share my wings.
I'm assuming they did that because the first one way based of a true story and this one was too.
share