Rating: 
Summary: Decent Flick
Review: I had NO intentions of seeing this movie. Heck, I didn't even want to watch it. My brother brought it over to my house and kept exclaiming how great a movie it was. So I got suckered in. Imagine my surprise to discover it was actually a pretty good movie. I'd never seen the original and I didn't have any expectations for this one, which was probably a good thing. All in all, I thought it was well written with superb actors. I'd definitely recommend it if yo want a fun, little scary, good movie to watch. It's not the best movie I've ever seen, but definitely enjoyable.
Rating: 
Summary: Worthless remake of a fun cult film from the 60's
Review: This movies was a complete waste of time. Do yourself a favor,avoid this ...remake and try to find the original(made in 1960 i believe). I like F. Murray Abraham but I sure would like to know how the producer's got him to do this [movie]. To sum it up,"beware the buyer"
Rating:
Summary: Whoa
Review: Okay, so the woman with the slashed breasts was a little hokey but the rest of the movie freaked me out. I am an avid horror movie fan and although I am not much for slasher films, I do like the scare factor in a movie and this was rated right up there for me. Even if you are sceptical, it is worth a rent for sure.
Rating:
Summary: The Cube Zombies!
Review: This movie is somewhat reminiscent of CUBE, a low-budget SF movie about a bunch of people caught in a multi-roomed prison where all the rooms seem alike but each has a particular method for controling its population (including elimination). This time its a glass house with moving glass walls that are etched with latin spells to keep the ghosts in. You can tell that a lot of money went into the production and the effects, and the performances were somewhat above average. It was nice to see F. Murry Abraham (Amadeus) working again. Unfortunately he wasn't given much to work with. He appears only twice and both times consist of 2-dimensional angry diatribes.
Matthew Lillard (Scream, Wing Commander) walks away with it playing the a psi-sensitive who seems to be the only one who knows what's going on. Without giving anything away, let me just warn you that the ending leaves a lot of unanswered questions. A good effort. Its nice to see someone actually spending serious money on making horror movies. All in all its pretty tame. The concept will interest fans of the genre, but it really doesn't open any new doors (or windows as the case may be). Question to the writer: "would you please tell me what the heck the big wheel on the floor of the "living room" was for? It was refered to as a door or something but it's never made clear. Oh well, gotta wait for part 2, I guess...
Rating: 
Summary: It Pretty Much Stinks
Review: This movie will appeal to fans of loud, fast-paced, special effects movies that lack plot and character development, but keep you watching nonetheless. It is based upon William Castle's 1960 film, which, although cheesy and dated, is actually a better film than this remake. Even having seen the previous version, it still took a long time for me to understand what exactly was going on here. This movie spends more time developing the "characters" of the ghosts than it does with the living people in the film. The characters are completely unmemorable. The wisecracking housekeeper was clearly added for comic relief, but seems out of place in this movie. I'm not saying the acting was bad (you can't do better than F. Murray Abraham), but you don't learn enough about any of these people to care about them. Some of them die, and you're left thinking, "Who cares?" Only the bare essentials of the original's plot is used, and very little of anything new was added. The scene in which the mother, who was alive in the original but has been killed in a fire here, comes back in ghost-form to tell the family how much she still cares is sheer hokiness. We, as an audience, don't care at all about these people, and even less about her. Sure the new house looks kinda cool, but the original was much creepier and came complete with a built-in Margaret Hamilton. And the "ghost viewers", which were handed out to movie theater patrons in 1960 (and are included in the DVD of the original version), are only worn by the actors in this version, and look like something the costume department bought by the gross at 68 cents a pair. At least the one in the original movie showed some imagination. See this movie if you must, but I recommend seeing the original also, so you can make your own comparison.
Rating: 
Summary: OK
Review: This movie was not great. I either have seen too many scary movies and my senses have been dulled down, or this movie was not scary at all. The movie jumped from scene to scene with no plot explanation. The acting was good, but the story [was not good]. There is... nudity and terrible lack of needed blood. Not Great!!!!
Rating:
Summary: One of the worst movies I have ever seen
Review: Horror movies are typically just ok at best. I did not have high expectations at all before seeing this movie. This has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Attempts at humor all fall flat. The dialogue is laughable. Had I been drunk then I could have at least given it 2 stars instead of 1. What a royal waste of my time.
Rating:
Summary: Average horror.
Review: Well I expected more from the people who brought me the shockingly frightening "House on Haunted Hill", but...
A eccentric ghost collector (F. Murray Abraham) is killed capturing a ghost (along with several other expendable crewman) and his house is given to his grieving widower nephew (Tony Shalhoub). The house may I say is spectacular! Well to make a long story short an associate of the deceased collector (Matthew Lillard) shows up, and the ghosts (conveniantly locked in the basement) get loose. Everyone runs away screaming, kids are captured, Dad has to save them. This would be a bad film, but Matthew Lillard is entertaining, and I really empathized with Tony Shalhoub. The kills are few, but bloody. The opening 360 degree shot is to die for (no pun intended). If haunted houses are your thing you might just dig this. Directed by Steve Beck. Rated R for Some choice words, a few gory killings, lots of gory sets (watch for the bathtub scene), and a naked female ghost who pops up frequently.
Rating:
Summary: Rent before you buy
Review: I really thought this was a great movie. I hated House on Haunted Hill, and when I heard it was from the same people I was hesitant to even rent it, but I did and then ended up buying it. It's not really a scary movie, but watching it at night can still give you chills. The ghosts are awesome and the make-up effects on the movie are amazing. Overall, it's a very good horror movie, that I think everyone should at least see once and give it a try.
Rating:
Summary: People were given MONEY to make this?
Review: This is the worst movie I have ever seen. it was not scarey. It was not funny. It was not good. But someone has obviously liked it because it is apparently selling.This scares me. This scares me good. Especially when I take into account that their votes count just as much as mine. If you like stupid movies with boobys and blood in them this is the flick for you. Unless of course, you don't like slashed up boobys.
|
