reasonbran234

First off, I think most "Omen" fans knew going in that they weren't going to see anything transcending or equaling the original. That would be a bit unrealistic. Julia Stiles is no Lee Remick, and Schreiber is certainly no Gregory Peck. Mia Farrow's role as Ms. Baylock does not come close that boorish original actress, whatever her name was. And finally, David Thewlis is no David Warner, at least not in this one. We do get some treats, actually more than a few; some of the stylistic additives the director decided to make work spectacularly, and I myself jumped at certain scenes as the other reviewer did. I liked seeing a different take on Damien as a little more threatening than Harvey Bernhard, although in the end I find this ineffectual. The scene in this film where Damien knocks Mrs. Thorn off the balcony with his bicycle is more maliciously done than in the first version. (Here Damien displays telepathic powers occasionally, too--that is how he and Ms. Baylock communicate and one of the ways that his mother ends up quite dead.

Whether you have seen the original film or not, some of this will be genuinely frightening--possibility for nightmare frightening. The ending was done beautifully and some of the classic scenes from the 76 versions were creatively enhanced. Not really remade, just enhanced.

The director wants the horror genre to survive, I think, and probably saw all the ridiculous remakes of decent ("When A Stranger Calls", etc) horror films and was unwilling to do that with "The Omen". God Bless him, no pun intended! Worth buying.

While this is a movie that depends very heavily on mystery and concealment, sometimes to the aggravation and annoyance the viewer, there is substance behind all the grisly gimmicks and despairing scenes: this is what one would call an "existential" film, and not in the pretentious sense.

I can fully understand the criticisms of the film. The "flashbacks" that the acidic and whiny surgeon have are indeed a little bit of a cop out, as you sort of come into the movie expecting a Hitchcockian kind of experiment, a film made in one room in the tradition of "Rope". If that was the idea that turned you on to this movie, it might not live up to your expectations, as most of the important parts are outside of the bathroom in which the two men are imprisoned.

Right from the beginning we know none of this can end well. The two leading men are irritating, amoral, and unsympathetic characters to say the least. The surgeon is a workaholic and solicitor of prostitutes, and Adam, the young photographer, is a burn out moron in the vein of early Keanu Reeves. It's hard to care about either of the characters at all, but when wife and children come into play, we do.

You may think that you have the film when it is halfway through, but you don't, so stick with it. The ending of this movie is one of the only genuine, "I'd have no idea until I saw it" shockers I've seen in years. In fact, the *ending* (by no means the entire movie) of this one probably transcends "Se7en" in terms of the level of sheer surprise it generates.

There are seriously unforgettable scenes. Each one with "the puppet", for example, will not leave your mind for quite sometime. There's something so inarticulately horrific about it; if your friend showed up at an intense Halloween party with it on it would not be cool. The killer is trying to teach his victims a lesson which is in many ways deeper than John Doe's rather conventional, Biblically inspired message. He tries to get a drug addict to feel some value for her body by putting a metallic, explosive "Man In the Iron Mask" type thing on her face and promising her that if she doesn't get the key in five minutes her head will be blown apart by it. The way that she obtains the key ain't for the squeamish.

The only huge flaw this movie really has (aside from some laughable dialogue between Adam and the surgeon) is that we never really get to know the killer, who despite being a psychopathic monster seems to have some real lessons to teach. It would have been interesting to hear him comment on his own crimes in his own voice, not the baritone, digitially altered, ominous scratch which narrates it's own atrocities.

Flaws aside, this is a gut wrenching film, almost flawlessly blending horrendous gore and morality. Recommended.

Rob Lowe is mildly okay as Ben Mears, but his performance goes nowhere near David Soul's angst ridden, really convincing portrayal from the 1979 original. Donald Suterland is disappointing, and I don't think it needs to be said that his performance is less than spectacular, even absurd. He's no James Mason.

Rutger Hauer gives a better performance than this series deserved. His portrayal of King's Barlow is more accurate than the Nosferatuesque Reggie Nalder, but somehow this seems to work to the film's detriment rather than benefit. Rent the original film, or miniseries. I had high expectations, maybe that they'd build on the original a little, but it's just rushed, badly acted, trying too hard to be modern, and in general, a waste of celluloid.