Rating: 
Summary: I'm still laughing....
Review: It takes courage to create comedy these days, particularly when you weren't intending to. What a shame that the talented Liam Neeson's first film that evokes sustained laughter does so because it's so bad, it's funny. Although based upon excellent material, this film slathers on the special effects with such ridiculous excess that the result generates all the intelligent believability of the "Poltergeist" films.What the film makers missed here is that the "Haunting of Hill House" story is intended to be a study of the effects of believable paranormal phenomena on a set of variously impressionable characters. As such, it requires the creation of scenes which indeed mimic reported paranormal experiences. And since there are just about no known cases of carved cherubs constantly changing facial expressions, or huge cast statues coming to malevolent life (much less someone getting their head knocked off by ghostly actions), the key concept of "credibility" is just a bit lacking here, to say the least. In short, if you really want to scare people, it's going to take more than just a "Ghostbusters gets serious" approach. The genesis of a convincing ghostly paranormal environment in which to play out the drama requires a concept completely lacking in this film - subtlety. Any ghost story based upon known reported incidents would build on unexplained sounds, unclear anomalous visions, and the human mind interpreting impressions and feelings. In other words, the exact approach followed by Robert Wise in creating the tremendously superior original 1963 film. The new film seemed to try at first to follow that path, but just couldn't keep itself from launching into a crescendo of splashy but totally unconvincing special effects. Toward the end, I'll admit I was looking for the Stay-Puff marshmallow man to get blown up! Do your self a favor and forget this film, unless you like a perverse belly-laugh. Go out and rent or buy the 1963 film, and see how a fine psychological horror film is really made.
Rating:
Summary: One of the Worst Remakes of a Really Superb Story
Review: I can't begin to describe how awful and stupid this movie was. I saw the original,I've read the book and I am truly angry that anyone would do this to a story. I'm shocked Liam would be in this masterpiece of stupidity, especially since this was supposed to be his last film. There were good actors, trying hard to salvage something. How can you salvage something from nothing? PLEASE don't waste anything, especially money on this version of Shirley Jackson's truly classic story. The book gives me creeps, especially if I read it alone at night. The original movie is still disturbingly real. Just what does walk at Hill House--well, whatever it is or isn't, I'm sure we both could agree on one thing. This movie can be summed up very much to the point--awfully stupid.They should be glad it isn't a crime to waste a movie.I gave it one star since there wasn't anything lower, say like, minus 1,000,000 stars, to choose from. Maybe the 'thing' from Hill House will get this movie and force the makers to watch it for eternity--insanity sure to ensue and poetic justice!
Rating:
Summary: Worst movie ever?
Review: Well, I'm not sure if it's the worse movie ever made, what with garbage like "Wild Wild West" and "The Beach" out there in abundance, but for anyone that saw the original and/or read Shirley Jackson's book, this is a definite must to avoid. Incoherent, unscary, muddled, wooden acting, and these are the high points. The best part of this movie-and I use the term loosely--is the house, although the house in the original is still a thousand times creepier. Only Lili Taylor can hold up her head after this train wreck passed off as cinema; alleged actors Liam Neeson and Catherine Zeta-Jones (who was obviously preoccupied with planning her fleecing of Mr. Mid-Life Crisis) go through the motions here, nothing more. And Owen Wilson from "Bottle Rocket"? Well, he tried, but the script, written by Hollywood's finest, falls flat from scene one. If one hates a good script, good dialogue and good acting, but loves CGI, then this is the movie for you. A painful experience, not unlike root canal without the anestesia. Do yourself a favor and see the original.
Rating:
Summary: Truly disappointing
Review: This was a truly disappointing movie. How could anyone take Liam Neeson and Catherine Zeta-Jones, add great special effects, and end up with a boring movie? Just awful.
Rating:
Summary: Worst Film Ever Made, ever!
Review: It's just bad. I've already written one review but I feel its my duty to make everyone avoid this hideous and vile mess at all costs. Rent the original!
Rating: 
Summary: Read the Book
Review: What made the book horrorific/good was not the special effects but the thoughts/feelings of the main characters. The ending was completely destroyed. The writers/director/producer should have stuck closer to the original story and this would have been a much better movie: a classic. C'est la vie.
Rating:
Summary: A very poorly done horror movie.
Review: A group of people who has sleeping problem are the subject of an experiment by a scientist (Liam Neeson). The experimen takes place in a haunted house. Doesn't make any sense to me. The story is bad, the screenplay is bad even all the performers here are bad. This is by far the worst movie by Jan de Bont. Frankly after the first "Speed", all his movies are going down hill and this one hits rock bottom. I am giving it 2 stars for outstanding audio and video quality of the DVD.
Rating: 
Summary: AMBITIOUS
Review: This is definitely better than HOHH but it was panned severely by critics because of the extreme overdose of CGI and the camp-gothic sets. Like HOHH, it is a remake of the original of the same name. The original Haunting was quite good for it's day. But let's be honest...it's not it's day anymore. But what annoyed ME most about this movie was Lillie Taylor's character. I just didn't like how she whispered every word and was a bit of a weirdo. The ending's a little corny but some decent frights throughout make up for that. The sound design in the cinema was incredible. I was very scary and you really did feel like there were ghosts behind you and from every other direction. It was most impressive. HOHH tried to be quick and frenetic. In doing so it lost character and dialogue. But The Haunting takes a little bit of time to build and in some places is almost a psychological horror. For these ambitions alone, it is better than House on Haunted Hill. The DVD is in Dolby 5.1 and is anamorphically enhanced at 2.35:1.
Rating: 
Summary: The Haunting
Review: Before I saw this movie I didn't expect much.It looked like another cheesy horror flick,and I have never enjoyed watching cheesy horror flicks (excepting JAWS,which I think is a triumph-did I say that out loud?) But anyway,my older brother started to rave about THE HAUNTING so I agreed to watch the copy my Mum had rented. From the word go I was hooked.The superb acting really struck me,the fear that those actors portrayed was splendid.The special effects had much to be desired,unfortunately,but the gripping storyline made my day.In fact,I was close to tears at the end when Nell and Luke died.The movie provoked so much thought and emotion in me that I had to watch it again,and when I did it was even more clear that THE HAUNTING was an exceptional film.
Rating:
Summary: A major disappointment
Review: Having read the brilliant novel by Shirley Jackson years ago, having seen the brilliant film by Robert Wise years ago I was very sceptic when I heard that Hollywood would be doing a remake of that horror classic and when I heard that "Mr.-No-Content-Twister-Jan-De-Bont" would direct this movie I was even more sceptic. The film turned out to be what I expected it to be. A lot of special effects, simplified story and by no means could that movie capture the feel of the novel or the brilliant adaption by Robert Wise. The actors in Wises' flic were all together brilliant, in De-Bont's version only Lily Taylor can sometimes live up to the original film. The original film lived from the "to-thrill-is-not-to-show" atmosphere and what made this movie so good were the actors, the music, the camera angles and the cuts - nothing of this is present in this remake, just a bunch of special effects. So my recommendation would be - read the book, watch the movie by Robert Wise but avoid the remake.
| 
