The Omen (2006)
Genre: Horror Thriller
Starring: Liev Schrieber ('Scream' Trilogy; RKO 281), Julia Stiles ('Bourne' Trilogy; Mona Lisa Smile)
Directed By: John Moore (Behind Enemy Lines; Flight Of The Phoenix)
Overview: In this remake of the 1976 horror classic, a diplomat discovers that his son may be the Anti-Christ, set to lead the world to Armageddon.
Acting: Let us begin with a good note. Liev does a great job, he shouldn't have a problem finding work from now on, good for him. Julia does passably well, David Thewlis as the photographer needed better direction and that stupid little Damian twerp has no intimidation factor whatsoever. Compare this to the original starring Gregory Peck (To Kill a Mockingbird; Cape Fear) and you will be sorely disappointed. I hate You John Moore, you two-bit hack! Bad director! Bad director!
Cinematography: "My favorite camera effect is swooping around the character as they look around. Do that as often as possible, ok camera guy?" If you start off a film with this premise, you'll find a film that is heavy panoramic, big on 'thriller' and low on originality. Christ, I'm getting dizzy over here. I got over it by the third scene. Each individual scene was shot really well but all together the movie has no cohesion, no flair. On top of everything, whenever Moore tried to recreate a scene just as in the original, the tribute failed miserably.
Script: I'd say a little over half the lines in this film are taken directly from the original script, which is nice for the memorabilia factor, I'll give you that. How on earth the delivery of said lines didn't do anything for me I suppose is the director's fault. The fears, the strife, the mad warning, all that is great, but this was like the third carbon copy down the line, it was just weak.
Plot: Why didn't you keep the original Mrs. Baylock fight scene? It's the best, goriest, most suspensful scene in the whole movie! No, instead you replace it with this moronic laughable, predictable tripe. As much as the story of a man raising Cain is great, somehow this version fell completely short. The entire movie was boring, except MAYBE five minutes of it. Not too predictable, but not too fun, either.
Mood: Zero cinematic timing. Every suspensful scene was sourly molested for lack of talent. This opens with a priest showing clips of the twin towers blowing up, people drowning in hurricanes and other signs of the apocalypse. What sick group of Archbishops need this kind of visual aid? I certainly don't need to bask in the mire of those horrible disasters again, but thanks for earning a buck off of them. You're lucky you get points for new kills, because your have no sense of subtlety. When you have a blueprint and a safety net in the original film, why not just recreate the moment if you can't do it on your own? Finally, how did the ending manage to suck so bad when it was identical to the original?!
Overall Rating: 46% (I Should Have Seen The Signs!!!)
Aftertaste: I thought my love of Horror would forgive the occasional 'not-done-as-well' moments. Turns out that moment was the entire film. Was I wrong to complain about this? Didn't I call it?! When you've seen a film six or seven times and have even gone so far as to watch all the pitiful sequels just to know the whole story, it's proof that you love a film. Why on earth did I even think about wasting my money? Way am I so STUPID?! God!
Someone even had the gall to tell me not to compare the remake with the original. I laughed at them and called them wrong. They're still wrong. Damn this movie to Hell!