It was ok.....but I have questions [spoilers]

Entertaining enough 👍 but I wouldn’t watch it again.
I think it could have been a lot more substantial as it was an interesting subject, and therefore it could have been a lot better. It could have been a gripping, more ‘sensible’ take, but instead it got to be more like a ‘teenage slasher flick’. For example the ending at the car was just so silly, and quite spoiled it. The psychological aspects would have been better too....for example why were the spirits of the original victims hell bent on torturing and killing the people in the bank, for or along with their murder’s spirit?

The whole film had a few too many loop holes and questionable parts in it to be truly gripping/exciting/amazingly interesting.
Some of the things that happened - or more to the point *didn't happen* that I query were...
* who was the man towards the end in the vault, I believe who had half a head? If it was the first robber to die (who took a drill to his temple) how did he get to have half a head, I mean, there’s no way he (or anyone else) could have done that to himself with a drill!!
* none of the robbers gave a fig about the second man from their team to die - he was ‘guarding’ the majority of the hostages in a strong room (modern bank’s vault?) and turned the shotgun on himself. Not once did any of the others mention him, or look for him etc. In fact, where did he go?! How come none of them saw or found his body at some point?!
* I appreciate a bank robbery hostage situation is stressful but, guessing at the number of employees at the bank.....how the heck did the younger bank teller not realise James Franco’s ‘ghost’ Assistant Manager wasn’t part of her team?! She should have been aware of who her colleagues are.
* I assume the 1982 murderer’s spirit somehow went back to the bank to be stuck in the ‘vault limbo’ with his victims, after he had died (out in the world, as he wasn’t caught or found dead in the bank).