Rating: 
Summary: TRITE, BORING, DISAPPOINTING
Review: It just didn't work. Astounding sets alone can't create on-screen chemistry. The story line and performances were weak, and, even worse, I didn't think it was scary...and wasn't that the whole idea? I left the theatre feeling cheated. This movie was just plain DUMB!
Rating:
Summary: Rip off of a classic and lousy in its own right
Review: First lets forget about the original movie and novel. The script is as bad as any I have ever seen. The miscasting, except for Lily Taylor, is amazing. The special effects are stupid and laughable. The set is impressive but inappropriate for the story. The pacing, suspense, just about everything is just miserable. Lots of loud noises and rumblings that startle, - anyone can do that.All of this is made worse when you consider that this is based on Shirley Jackson's excellent and subtle novel, and Robert Wise's superb 1963 realization. The new movie has only the bare bones of the plot, and none of the spirit or intent. Director DeBont claims this is not a "remake" but when you make a movie in any way derived from a classic you better have something good to offer, as comparisons will be made. One can only imagine using the pedigree of The Haunting of Hill House was only way to get attention for this clunker. In any case, it is really an insult to a fine writer and a legendary director. What could the principals in this movie be thinking of to be associated with this mess? They'd best leave it off their resumes!
Rating: 
Summary: Haunting.....sort of
Review: The newly updated film version of Shirley Jackson's "The Haunting of Hill House" is somewhat acceptable. If your looking for some good effects and a strong character lead, "The Haunting" is your cup of tea. For the rest of us who want something scary, "The Haunting" was definitely not it. For the first hour of the movie, it's creepy and fun as we explore the house along with the actors. But as the second half begins to roll, "The Haunting" loses steam. If your a person who enjoys the sights and sounds of a high budget film, buy "The Haunting". But for those who want class in their horror flicks, definitely leave this one out of the collection.
Rating: 
Summary: I might be hated for saying this, but I liked this movie!
Review: Ok, I have to admit it. It is nothing like the original or the book. It doesn't even have the same ending. But this movie keeps you on the edge of your seat. The special effects are breath-taking, and the sound is excellent. If you have surround sound, you must see this movie. The acting is also good. One thing is missing though. The scare factor. The movie has its moments but not enough. That's why it didn't receive 5 stars from me.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a Horror Movie, but an excellent Thriller!
Review: This movie is filled with great special effects and a storyline to put it all together, although the acting is a somewhat bad at points in the movie; I found The Haunting to an intriguing, and exciting movie.
Rating:
Summary: Don't waste your time with this unnecessary remake
Review: The original was better. I mean WAY better. I already had a lot of respect for the original as a neat little 60's horror flick but this movie made it look even better in comparison. Why didn't they leave it alone? It didn't help that the original was a classic. But they messed up here. I hardly ever say this, but the effects were overdone--they didn't make up for the putrid script or lack of scares. There was only one moment when I jumped and that was because everyone else in the theater screamed and scared me. Plenty of people were laughing at parts that were not supposed to be funny--not a good sign. There was just no excuse for the amazingly stupid line, "It's about family!" which would make you wince under any circumstances but came at what was supposed to be the climax of the film. The house is supposed to look old, but it is so obvious that it was just created by a set designer or is CGI. Really not very scary. The sound was good, I'll give it that, but that was about it. The writers obviously just threw in Theo's character being bisexual because they knew the guys who think Zeta-Jones is hot would get off on it--unlike the novel, where there is a point to it. Really, see a matinee--if you really MUST see it, that is, which I do not recommend--and see it while the theaters are still packed, which makes it more of a thrill ride. All the so called 'scares' and CGI in this film put together do not even measure up to be 10% as scary as the scene in the original where Nell thinks Theo is holding her hand in bed but turns on the light to see her friend across the room, who had been asleep in her own bed. I had a bad feeling about this movie when I saw the trailer months ago that featured the tagline "Some Houses Are Born Bad". Should have stuck with my original instincts on this one and saved my time and my 7+ bucks. Do yourself a favor and rent the original instead.
Rating:
Summary: This is not a horror movie.
Review: This is not a horror movie- it is an interesting science fiction movie. However, it is a science fiction movie with bad special effects and a bad dialogue. The acting is good, but that just doesn't make up for it. I didn't buy this movie- I went to see it once in the theatre, and that was enough for me. If you want a real horror movie, check out The Sixth Sense.
Rating:
Summary: Best low sound from your DVD
Review: If you like very low sound, I really mean low, with a subwoofer, then buy this one. You can impress your friends by seeing this movie at midnight. This DVD is so real you don't want to sleep after watching.
Rating:
Summary: Halfway decent beginning destroyed by terrible ending.
Review: The beginning was pretty decent, more or less following the story of Shirley Jackson's novel, although the attempt at updating the character's motives for being in the house was ludicrous. Gone from this film was the subtlety of the original. When reading the book or watching the original movie, the audience (or reader) is left wondering whether the story is about a woman going insane or a haunted house claiming a soul. This movie, with admittedly great effects by Phil Tippett, leaves no doubt. There are ghosts in that place, as loud & obvious as the ghosts in the far superior Poltergeist. The house was no longer built with the angles ever so slightly off, but instead merely slapped togather haphazardly. Gone also is the rivalry between the two female leads, and the creepiest part in the book and the original movie is reduced to a single absurd line in this film ("who was holding my hand?"). There is one genuinely scary part of the movie-- when, during some mysterious banging, Lilli Taylor wakes up and addresses her dead mother (who, while ill, would call to Lilli by banging on the wall.) It was the one moment which stuck in the imagination. Jan deBont should stick to movies with big guns, that is if he is ever allowed to make another movie. Catherine Zeta-Jones was great to look at & did a whole lot with very, very little. Liam Neeson had no need to care about his performance; he was in Star Wars: Episode I-The Phantom Menace. Lili Taylor, always impressive in independant movies, still proves herself capable & deserving of better material than this (although considering the literary source, she was well-cast.) Owen Wilson was likewise competent. But unfortuneately, this movie proves that good acting & good special effects can't make up for a shoddy script, and a director who just can't do subtlety.
Rating:
Summary: WHY IS THIS MOVIE LISTED UNDER HORROR?
Review: I went to the theater and saw this movie.It turned out to be a wast of time and money.The plot was just plain stupid.I didn't find myself scared during the movie,because there was nowhere to get scared.The only reason why I gave it two stars is because of Cathrine Zeta Jones.
|
