2hotFeature one of my absolute favorites!

Merolliv I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

Leoni Haney Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Filipe Neto This is a remake of William Castle's 1959 film, and tells of how an eccentric millionaire invites a small group of chosen to a haunted house, challenging them to spend a night there in exchange for a huge sum of money for those who survive to tell it. The rich man's idea is to get the ultimate scary experience, but it's spoiled when everyone realizes that the house is truly haunted. OK... the plot is not new, it has been seen several times in cinema. What makes this movie enjoyable is that it can really improve its predecessor and really scare us. Contrary to the formula of American terror, this film doesn't just make us jump, it does it every ten minutes and, in the middle, it creates a deeply tense and strong atmosphere that doesn't let the audience rest. There is intense gore but it's not a movie that only bets on that to scare us. The ending is disappointing, though. Rather than improving, the climax is extremely based on CGI. As far as the cast's work is concerned, the strongest actor is clearly the veteran Geoffrey Rush, with a characterization clearly inspired by Frederic Loren, a character played in 1959 by Vincent Price. Famke Janssen, Chris Kattan and Jeffrey Combs also pleased me. The soundtrack was well chosen, fitting well in the film, especially the song "Sweet Dreams (are made of this)", in a cover by Marilyn Manson.

Leofwine_draca The Hollywood remake machine goes into auto-production with this thinly-plotted and rather unnecessary rehash of William Castle's classy fun-filled fright fest, which utilised the talents of an exceptionally hammy Vincent Price and had plenty of macabre laughs to keep things moving. Forty years later, only the quality of the special effects have improved, but the film falls down everywhere else. It's a sad state when the art of film-making actually appears to have gone into regression instead of progressing.This admittedly glossy production starts off on the right foot with an old-fashioned "inmates taking over the asylum" scene complete with bloody torture, gruesome murder, and a cameoing Jeffrey Combs as a crazed doctor complete with goggle glasses and a demented grin. From then on the film plays out much of the plot of the original, right down to the guns encased in little coffins, but it ruins things by actually making the film too complicated. While the first film had a nice, simple to follow plot with a clear beginning, middle, and end, the remake tries to have too many plot strands and ends up coming off as a muddled mess. It's a shame, really, as there are some really nice ideas swimming around in this mess of a film (I especially liked the bit with the video camera, and some of the artier supernatural moments).By the ending, things have predictably become routine, with the survivors running away from a special effect and trying not to get killed. Things are pretty frantic, but it all rings a bit hollow to tell the truth. The whole subplot concerning Price's wife having an affair with a guest is totally spoilt by having one too many twists and turns and ends up being pointless anyway as all three are dead by the end of the film. The acting is pretty bad; the actors and actresses here really should have learned the meaning of the word "restraint" as they ham for all they're worth, especially in the cases of Geoffrey Rush (a surprise, considering his recent Oscar winning) and Famke Janssen (annoying). The only thing of note about Rush is his uncanny resemblance to Vincent Price; otherwise, his hammy routine quickly becomes a bore. Of the rest of the cast, only Taye Diggs and Ali Larter come out with any respect, as the rest of the actors are a totally charisma-free bunch.The tone of this film is a light one, but oddly enough there are a number of very dark and grisly scenes too. These lie oddly together, and the film unsuccessfully tries to blend the horror and comedy genres, but sadly fails. Gore highlights basically consist of dismembered and mutilated corpses, which run the gamut from decapitation to total dissection. The special effects are good, yes, but it all gets a little CGI-heavy towards the ending. Once again we have some great SFX trapped in a below average film, with a clichéd and unoriginal plot and poor acting too. Whichever way you look at this, you're bound to be disappointed.

outrunkid This is a great film which offers some genuinely shocking and jumpy moments. Judging from the rating and the hate in the other reviews I've read I found this actually quite a fair and respectful remake which attempted successfully to take it in a new direction. Geoffrey Rush gives a deliciously camp performance which is totally OTT but entirely suitable for the subject and the fact that he is playing a role previously played by the horror king Vincent Price. A great horror, with twists and turns, with a directing style that is quite 1960's Batman in a way but works well, producing an effect with proves unsettling, a great additional feature for a horror.

kai ringler First off let's get this out of the way,, of course folks the Original with Vincent Price was better.. that being said,, I like how this one doesn't entirely follow the original,, case in point,, in this "new" one the house used to be an old Asylum where hundreds , perhaps thousands were mistreated to cruel and unusual punishment, most of the film does follow the original,, same premise,, millionaire invites 10 people to spend the night and if they survive the money is theirs. what I liked about this film , is all of the special fx. all of the blood and gore that we wanted in the first one and couldn't get because it was just the dawn of color, and the technology obviously wasn't there yet,, all in all I think this one was pretty good,, so I apologize to Vincent Price,,, but still the ORIGINAL was better as far as plot and acting wise goes,,,