|
Post by MacReadyOrNot on Jan 26, 2020 10:32:11 GMT -5
For me, personally, I'm not a big fan of either one. John Carpenter missed the mark and created this weird movie that included an unnecessary character/plotline in Kirstie Alley, and the scares weren't really there.
The original is a bit stiff. A bit stuffy. I don't believe George Sanders in the role he was given. Too old.
I'm still waiting for a great Village of the Damned movie. Maybe Netflix could make a series of it with the person they got to do Haunting of Hill House for them.
|
|
|
Post by MacReadyOrNot on Jan 26, 2020 10:34:12 GMT -5
I do prefer the original, for the most part, but I'm still going with neither. Give me a better adaptation.
|
|
|
Post by magicmuggle01 on Aug 13, 2020 10:37:52 GMT -5
I'm undecided on this one.
Both films were well made and offered a great deal of mystery.
The remake with Christopher Reeves was a bit more tense I thought.
|
|
|
Post by endo on Aug 13, 2020 16:25:48 GMT -5
I saw the original when I was a kid and I've caught it a couple of times on Svengoolie. I liked both OK, but I'll usually take the original unless the remake blew me away. Both are pretty creepy.
|
|
|
Post by queenfreaky2 on Apr 21, 2021 8:32:58 GMT -5
I saw the remake first and was super creeped out by the neon blonde hair and shiny eye thing those kids had going on. It was ok but the plastic looking children were far more horrifying then the film and its concept itself then saw the original and was bored silly maybe because the remake had already spoiled it for me.
|
|