Rating: 
Summary: If you're over 12, stick with the original . . .
Review: So-so remake of the 1963 classic starring Julie Harris and Claire Bloom (the 1963 version being MUCH more suspenseful). Unfortunately, this version suffers, instead of benefits, from the CGI special effects, which aren't really that scary . . you'll probably find yourself oohing and aahing at some point, but that's about it. I found two scenes rather detracted from the film (and were more amusing than anything else): first, the arrival of Zeta-Jones at the house and her obligatory changing scene, then subsequent shots of her tight posterior as she sashays down the hallways of the house in a pair of go-go type boots like one of Charlie's Angels (giving the male element a bit of a thrill); and the (very contrived) graphic death of one of the characters that didn't take place in the original version - you'll probably be shaking your head, as I was in the theater. I also didn't appreciate the over-simplification of the plot that was incorporated in this film . . it took away from the house ITSELF being the source of the "evil" and focussed it on some guy who owned the house years before and abused children or something. The ending will also somewhat disappoint fans of the original film . . I found the ending to the 1960's version to be nothing short of awesome.
Rating: 
Summary: The HOUSE is Eye-Candy!!!
Review: Now I liked the story, but thought it was a bit weak, and I didn't like the ending very well. BUT....THAT HOUSE!!!! O MY GOD THAT GORGEOUS-GARGANTUAN-GOTHIC HOUSE!!!!!! For any Gothic/Castle/Mansion Lover, YOU MUST CHECK OUT THIS HOUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I WANT TO LIVE IN ONE LIKE THIS!!!!!!!!! Words cannot do this house justice enough!!!!
Rating: 
Summary: bloody awful
Review: Only in this, the age of mediocrity, could a piece of rubbish like this get made. Owen Wilson turns in one of the worst performances in recent memory. This was made strictly for the idiots who find MTV enthralling. Numbingly bad.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a masterpiece, but sertainly worth the time.
Review: First of all, I might mention that I think Catherine Zeta-Jones is one of the most beautiful women in the world, if not the most beautiful. That might be part of my great experience.. :) I found this movie to be very eerie and it really got to me. Some of the scenes were just fantastic, and the special effects were excellent. Not even the people who put this movie down can argue with that. Part of the creepiness is the fact that you can hear these childrens voices all the time. VERY creepy in fact! The movie isn't gory in any way, and if you like mayhem you might not like this movie, but if you like chills (like me)... It's a given success!
Rating:
Summary: Ehhh , nice visuals?
Review: I read the book prior to wathching the film. I can only say that I was extremely dissapointed in this film. Not only did the movie insult Shirley Jackson's classic book, but also made fools of the great actors in the movie. By me saying that the movie made fools of the actors, I mean look at them , Liam neeson, Lili Taylor and Cathrine Zeta Jones , theyre all very talented but all you can do is laugh at them in this movie because the script is terrible and also very over exagerated. Donnot be fooled by this movies name. The occurances of "hauntings" in this movie look like they came out of a disney movie. Now the only positive thing I can say about this movie is that it has great visual effects, and does make you say wow when you see the house itself. So think of this movie as disneys rendition of Shirly Jacksons book. And if youd like to see what her book is really about rent the original 1963 classic with Julie Harris and Claire Bloom.
Rating:
Summary: Two hours I'll never get back!
Review: When I heard they were remaking "The Haunting," I was excited. I love the original movie. I thought that with the modern techniques we have, we could make a good movie better. I was wrong. Sitting through this stinker was torture. It was one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The only thing that's similar to Shirley Jackson's novel and the original movie is the name. Want to do something fun? Go get a root canal. It would be a lot more fun than this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Haunting - Great Amusement Park Ride - Average Film
Review: If you watch movies on your home theater system more for the effects and thunder of the subwoofer, then this movie rocks. If not, and you still watch movies to be entertained, then you will be kinda disappointed with this movie. It has some of the deepest bass extension in the LFE section of the soundtrack that I have ever encountered in my system. However, that was the best part of the movie. The sound effects. Awesome. The movie... Oh yeah... there was a movie. It was OK. Nothing more. But the effects make it worth the buy if you have a Dolby Digital system.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best horror movies I've ever seen
Review: I can't believe some of the reviews that I've read on Amazon's website. "The Haunting" is one of the best horror movies I've ever seen. I didn't see anything that I didn't like about it. Some people that are part of an experiment have to stay overnight in a house that they don't know is haunted. One of the women finds out that she is part of the family that died in the house and that she needs to stay there. The reason I liked "The Haunting" so much is because it did what most horror movies never have. It combines some great special effects with a good story that's actually a little bit haunting. Without a doubt, "The Haunting" has the best special effects I've ever seen in a horror movie. The haunted house that was used in the movie couldn't have been any better. The sound effects are also well done, like when you see the statues of kids and you can hear them all calling for Eleanor's help. If you like great horror movies, you can't miss "The Haunting." I can't believe it's not more popular than it is because I couldn't find anything I didn't like about it. Unlike most horror movies, it actually gave me a sense of fear from time to time and it kept me entertained all the way through.
Rating:
Summary: this movie sucks!
Review: This is one of the most horrible movies i've ever seen. It starts off promising with a creepy house and an old story of how the house is haunted. From there it gets worse and worse and worse until the ending, which might be the dumbest ending i've ever had to sit through. This movie only deserves one star but Catherin Zeta Jones looked very very attractive in the movie (like always) and i had to give it an extra star just for her. P.S. what's up with her and Micheal Douglas, that's just a shame.
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.
| 
