Reviews

For once, the acting is very good in one of these teen-horror movies, and the direction wasn't bad (though pretty predictable) -- but the story was so weak and confused that the film suffered terribly.

The title was totally off the mark -- the girl wasn't haunted in the "normal," popular use of the term, more "possessed" than haunted. And what was that prelude about? It was just a false start, for all practical purposes. (Yes, I do get that the 1997 girl was supposed to be another "chosen one," but the dating seemed arbitrary and silly -- if she were "chosen" and unique, and then was ((SPOILER ALERT))killed on the cusp of her 18th birthday, wouldn't those who set the whole choosing thing up need 18 years plus the length of a pregnancy to set up the next one? So "1997" should have been "1987," right? Indicative of the lack of internal logic in this film.) But I enjoyed the performances of all the main actors. Jake Weber was the only one I've consciously seen before, as the father, and he was good. The main character was believable and sympathetic, as was her punkish friend. The male lead, a Zac Efron look-alike (which may not be a good thing for his career) was good enough, the girl playing his girlfriend had weird hair but aside from that, was decent.

I generally don't like remakes, they seem so, I don't know... unoriginal somehow. This was no exception, except it was genuinely well done.

The art direction was flawless, except wasn't it just a LITTLE odd that the Ambassador didn't live in the official residence, and what he did live in looked like a remodeled church?

The psychiatrist's office was virtually identical to that in "The Sopranos."

Damien riding his Razor through the halls looked an awful lot like what Kubrick did in the halls at the Overlook Hotel in The Shining... or did Kubrick rip it off from the original Omen??

Great casting of Mia Farrow! And what a great kill! (Oops, did that need a SPOILER warning? It's a REMAKE fer chrissake!)

I liked Liev Scheiber: he seemed to be channeling Gregory Peck, the same tone of voice, the same phrasing.

Julia Stiles wasn't bad, despite the reviews I read at the time.

When Pete Postlethwaite had his terminal experience, I liked how in the original the lightening came from a clear sky. Would have been cool if the storm had stopped the moment he... well, died.

David Thewlis made an excellent David Warner. Cynical but not annoyingly so!

I'm not sure I liked the color palate: too blue, great for London and the icy Italian monastery, but still too blue in Jerusalem and Rome (even though it was supposed to be winter).

Specific criticisms (and yes, I did take notes while watching): Why did Postlethwaite's priest have a 666 brand?

Why didn't Scheiber or Thewlis wear hats in the winter scenes in Italy? People wear hats in winter, especially if it's snowing!

*HERE THERE BE SPOILERS*

Wouldn't an embolism show up on an autopsy?

Could you beat off a determined Rottweiler attack with a tire iron?

Would the top of that sign-thing be sharp enough to behead somebody? And it would have had to have been extremely well balanced to spin like that and not just crash against the wall, before falling in a heap and crushing the poor bugger.

Would a new-looking Kohler kitchen faucet drip?

Didn't Damien's birthmark look more like ringworm than a birthmark??

Why didn't that cardinal with the dying Pope take that chalice of wine? Now they'll have to get those sheets dry-cleaned!

Why did they save Jerry Goldsmith's Oscar-winning score for the end credits?? The new score was excellent, BTW... and I'm glad Goldsmith's was reused a bit, but more would have been good!

And doesn't everybody in the world know where Meggido is, by now? Especially a foreign-service diplomat, when he was training to have a Mediterranean post. (I liked that they made him bilingual, BTW: nice touch of realism.)

That's about it. I enjoyed it, and if you liked the original, you won't be too disappointed with this one. The kills were all good, too,and that's important for a film like this!

This is a wonderful evocation of its period. The writing, direction and especially the acting are all above average -- even David Arquette does a reasonably successful job of playing a 30-years younger Robert Duvall-as-Gus-McCrae. He may be imitating Duvall's performance somewhat, but he does a decent job -- it's quite believable that this Gus McCrae developed into the later one.

Jonny Lee Miller -- so tight-lipped it's sometimes unbelievable -- does a good job with a thankless role -- "Corporal" Woodrow Call, as the young Clara dubs him (to Gus's consernation).

Jennifer Garner played Clara very well. Her flirtatious flippancy is both alluring and endearing -- and only a little annoying.

Edward James Olmos is perfect, as usual. He's one of my favorite actors, has been since Zoot Suit.

The costuming and setting are exemplary and very true to the pre-Mexican War Southwest.

The only technical/historical problem I have with this film is the weaponry. The flintlock muskets and rifles don't sound correct, and don't discharge nearly enough smoke. (SEMI-SPOILER COMING) No firing squad would shoot with bayonets attached (they detract from accuracy). But the mixture of Colt's Patent Revolvers (tm) and single-shot pistols was correct.

Of course this work pales in comparison to the book -- even the excellent Lonesome Dove was no match for the book. But this is far superior to the L-D sequel, Streets of Laredo.