I enjoyed the first film, so I decided to spend the $3 to rent the second, which has a higher rating on Amazon.
I like that he started the film by calling out those who tried to debunk the first film. It seems he took feedback from reviews and decided to include a disclaimer on this film, permitting him to change or omit names for privacy. I like that detail. Even though we know (believe, want to believe) that all these found footage films are fake, I like the inclusion of disclaimers or summarized back stories ("unknown events... until this footage was discovered").
He starts the documentary off stating he wasn't sure if he had enough information for another full documentary. I noticed then that over the next 30 minutes there was a lot of extraneous shots that really seemed to serve no other purpose than to lengthen the film. Admittedly, it does build suspense and add drama to the discovery and uncovering of certain plot points/information.
His editing skills improved with this film. I love getting to see multiple angles at once in these movies. It gives it a more realistic feel because it isn't just a bunch of best takes spliced together.
I actually really liked the main character. Whether it was an act or not, he seems like a real person. He's a little snippy with his wife, a bit shady, a tad unlikable, but he seems like a genuine human being trying to make a documentary. I also enjoyed how he continually addressed the haters and skeptics of the first film. It added authenticity, I thought.
One gripe I do have with the entire film is this: he has cameras set up everywhere. Yet he doesn't show us the footage of things happening on camera. This is the only thing that creates some doubt. Why have all those cameras and not use the footage? I'm assuming its edited this way to build suspense for the final night which, of course, has the most activity.
Regardless of whether it's real or fake, I found this movie very entertaining. It was well filmed, edited, and presented. I'd recommend to any fan of the genre.