View Today's Active Threads (No Chit Chat/Chit Chat Only) / View New Posts (No Chit Chat/Chit Chat Only) / Mark All Boards Read / Chit Chat Board
Chit Chat - Main Board / Games / Movies / Music / Sports / Video Games / Chit Chat - Classic / View Latest Threads in All Chit Chat Boards
![]() |
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Freakshow
Moderator
Forum Icon Join Date: Feb 01, 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 57,129
|
Movie Reviews: Don't Be Afraid of the Dark3
Most critics seem to agree that Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark, a remake of a 1973 made-for-tv movie, is more creepy than frightening, but then critics are notoriously unfrightenable. Indeed Michael Phillips in the Chicago Sun-Times comments on filmmaker Guillermo del Toro’s remark that the scariest movie ever made for TV was the original version. “He’s not really talking about the teleplay itself, he’s remembering, fondly, his own preteen susceptibility — what it was like to be a freaked-out kid watching a moderately well-made, cleverly suggestive haunted-house thriller.” Phillips’s take on the new version which Del Toro wrote and produced and Troy Nixey directed: “Fairly good at best.” Steven Rea in the Philadelphia Inquirer dismisses it similarly. “Minor-key scare fare,” he calls it. Betsy Sharkey of the Los Angeles Times finds the first 30 minutes of the movie “properly terrifying” but gives the rest of the film a drubbing: (“…fear gives way to boredom, then frustration…”) Most critics seem to agree that the gremlins in the movie should have remained unseen. Roger Ebert in the Chicago Sun-Times writes that seeing the creatures is disappointing. The mastery of computer-generated graphics, “allow filmmakers to show just about anything they can imagine, when sometimes it’s scarier to show nothing at all.” (Nevertheless, Ebert concludes, “This is a very good haunted house film.”) Roger Moore in the Orlando Sentinel writes: “The terror we don’t see is always scarier than critters who look like digital pixies from the Harry Potter movies.” On the other hand, Elizabeth Weitzman in the New York Daily News finds the movie “enjoyably spooky,” adding: “If you flinch at ‘boo,’ you’ll find plenty to jump at here. Just don’t expect striking originality.” -IMDB News |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
That '70s Girl
Forum Veteran
|
This movie was absolutely awful! How it could even be marketed as horror is beyond me. The build-up to those unscary, almost laughable creatures was painful, and it could've been cut down by at least a half hour. Save your money
|
|
__________________
Live a little be a gypsy get around http://www.librarything.com/profile/skelterhelter http://retrogirl82.dvdaf.com/owned formerly Retrogirl82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Omaha & Fritz
Forum Star
Join Date: Mar 06, 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 19,036
|
Still haven't seen the remake, but the original remains(I think) the best made-for-TV horror film. I was hoping with the release of the remake we would get a GOOD DVD release of the film, anything would be better than the crappy Warner Archive release.
|
|
__________________
"I'm going to go do something productive. I'm gonna go watch television." - Ray Peterson, The 'burbs "I am the literary equivalent of a Big Mac and Fries." - Stephen King "There's nothing wrong with G-rated movies, as long as there's lots of sex and violence." - Elvira |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|