Acting in this movie is amateur (makes one wonder what motivated the choice of genre), representing typical, nonetheless exasperating, mix of inadequate feelings (consequently, behavior) and involuntary pauses between lines being filled with either blank or bewildered facial expressions.
Arguably, the plot isn't much worse than that of the "exclusive horror" movie majority, meaning it's plain, predictable and thus, boring (when not silly).
Dialogues complete "Mr. Hell" as a cinematographic disaster, being fragmentary, extremely uninformative and unnatural. Moreover, sadly, the writers chose to uphold the flawed tradition of covering up the lack of scariness with would-be humor, would-be irony and would-be sarcasm, manifested in shabby, overly repetitive "cliché - change of context - touché" form.
The only thing that counts positive is solid B-class photography.
Arguably, the plot isn't much worse than that of the "exclusive horror" movie majority, meaning it's plain, predictable and thus, boring (when not silly).
Dialogues complete "Mr. Hell" as a cinematographic disaster, being fragmentary, extremely uninformative and unnatural. Moreover, sadly, the writers chose to uphold the flawed tradition of covering up the lack of scariness with would-be humor, would-be irony and would-be sarcasm, manifested in shabby, overly repetitive "cliché - change of context - touché" form.
The only thing that counts positive is solid B-class photography.