The Omen

For some reason (lack of originality?), Hollywood continues to produce remake after remake of films that don't necessarily need to be remade. Sure, The Thomas Crown Affair was supposedly a good remake, but I wouldn't know: I didn't see it (I hear Rene Russo is ten shades of hot in that movie, though. Gentlemen?). One that severely pissed me off was the remake of Charade, entitled The Truth About Charlie (and apparently several other remakes as well!). Maybe it was good. Again, I wouldn't know. It's just... why would you remake an Audrey Hepburn movie?

But I did see The Omen. After scaring myself to tears watching the original on AMC one night, I figured that there was no way the remake could improve upon the film, especially after reading that the director changed very little and even brought in the original screenwriter to pen his remake. So yes, I went into the movie with a bit of a bias and fairly low expectations.

You know, though... it wasn't that bad. The horrifying music from the original was missing, but replaced with a pretty scary score. There is no filling Gregory Peck's shoes, but Liev Schreiber did a pretty good job (I do agree with pajiba's reviewer though: he was a bit of a baby). Julia Stiles... well, she's... pretty!

And there were some legitimately jumpy scenes. To spare some details for those who have yet to see either version (and might actually want to), there's a pivotal scene with some scary-ass dogs. Devil's minion attacking killer dogs. I turned to Amanda at the point in the movie where I expected them to be and said, "the dogs are coming soon," and no more than a second later, they were hurled into the scene by what I can only imagine was the scent of a gigantic milkbone in the actor's pocket, and I jumped a foot off of my chair. I KNEW that the damn dogs were going to be attacking, and yet I was fooled. There were a few other similar scenes, where the director used the camera to his advantage and drew in the viewer as close as possible only to catapult him or her a foot into the air. Those were fun scenes!

The people in the theater were hilarious as well. Those sequences were very effective in soliciting screams, and my fellow patrons did not disappoint. I don't think that I've ever been in a theater where the screaming and yelling was that loud and exaggerated, but it was much welcomed comic relief at a few points.

Alternatively, the unintentional comic relief came from the one actor who should have exuded anything but humor: Damien. Poor little child actor. It seemed like he had fewer than five lines in the whole freaking movie, and his main purpose was to look, literally, like the Devil's spawn. He didn't really pull it off - something for which I blame the director. If directors can get golden children Haley Joel Osment and Dakota Fanning to freak us out (although some would probably argue that they don't need any help in that department), director John Moore should have been able to get Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick to resemble something other than a child who's trying not to laugh. And losing the battle.

Mia Farrow was incredible as the nanny. Her quiet, understated, very strong performance was the best part of the film.

As I've also read in other reviews, I think that the reason that the original's popularity had a great deal to do with the cultural climate in America at the time. People just aren't as scared these days - we've witnessed some truly horrible things as of late (granted, the country had just gone through Vietnam at the time, but America hadn't been attacked). Horror films keep pushing the envelope, trying to be scarier and more disgusting. I think that movies like The Sixth Sense, for example, are much more effective in achieving fear because they force the viewer to question his or her own mortality. Throw in religion to the mix, and those who believe in a higher power are given even more to contemplate. And fear.

If you've seen the original, skip this version. If not, I would recommend it. But make sure to see the original afterwards.