Featured Audience Ratings

• Jeff "

  
  Unnecessary remake of a classic, this version of Richard Donner's The Omen is almost exactly like the original horror classic. The only difference is, is that everything is up to date, style wise, technology wise and so forth. This remake is worthless, and what's surprising… More
  Unnecessary remake of a classic, this version of Richard Donner's The Omen is almost exactly like the original horror classic. The only difference is, is that everything is up to date, style wise, technology wise and so forth. This remake is worthless, and what's surprising is the impressive cast here. Not even a cast like this can save a dull film like this. If you've seen the far superior original directed by Richard Donner, skip this film. I'm actually surprised that with the talent involved, the filmmakers couldn't create a more effective remake. Instead this is a shot for shot clone and it's boring, dull, and above all lacks any real horror because, well it's predictable. There are some remakes that are good, unfortunately this updated version of The Omen isn't one of them. The film is very much like Gus Van Sant's version of Psycho. The reason that this film is terrible is that the film doesn't do anything, besides copying the original. For what it is, this is a mediocre horror film that is somewhat entertaining, but lacks the fire of the classic. The film simply misses the mark, and this the type of film that really puts an emphasis on unoriginality. Despite the cast, this film simply lacked the fire of the original, it's exactly the same film, except it's updated for modern times. The reason the film fails is that we know right from the start what happens, and the payoff just isn't like the original film. If you do watch this, you're watching the same film, minus the original jolts that the classic Omen delivered so well.

• Dean !

  
  I've not seen the original to be honest, so I can't compare them. I have to say though this was quite slow moving, more creepy than scary. The original has quite a reputation, which might be a little dated now. This just didn't deliver any scares, jumps or action for… More
  I've not seen the original to be honest, so I can't compare them. I have to say though this was quite slow moving, more creepy than scary. The original has quite a reputation, which might be a little dated now. This just didn't deliver any scares, jumps or action for me, shame as it has a very good cast!

• Eric A

  
  Didn't think it was 26% bad, but it could have been alot better. It has its fair share of good scares though.

• Lee ?

  
  Pointless remake which did nothing to add anything original and different except to jazz up the death scenes with a bit of blood. The 1976 original was superior in every way and not once did this remake come close to challenging it. Wasn't really scary, a few cheap frights were… More
  Pointless remake which did nothing to add anything original and different except to jazz up the death scenes with a bit of blood. The 1976 original was superior in every way and not once did this remake come close to challenging it. Wasn't really scary, a few cheap frights were thrown in here and there and, like I mentioned before, a couple of the death scenes have been over-sylized which admittedly do look impressive, but it takes away any scare appeal. Marco Beltrami did a very good job with the musical score, but stil, it's not a match for Jerry Goldsmiths Oscar winning original. This one will probably be enjoyed more by people who have not seen the excellent original version.

• Albert K

  
  Booooring. The only scene that scared me? A grandma jumping on Liev Schreiber. The only reason that this movie brought me to watch this movie was its marketing technique: 6.6.06. Pretty cool. Movie? Pretty bad.

• vieras e

  
  I watched this as an AU Harry Potter film. The boy they really didn't want to attend Hogwarts. Lupin and Dumbledore were there, and so were Sirius Black (in his animal form) and (an even further disfigured) Voldemort.

• Dead A

  
  Why make a remake if the original one is already good? But this wasn't that bad. But if they're making a remake it should have been better right? Ah well

• Jeremy S

  
  We Are Very Concerned, For The Wrong Reasons. If your questioning, in the age of remakes in which we live, how can one make a good remake of a bad film, the answer is 'The Omen'. It is a horror with fair performances from an surprisingly varied cast, fascinating story and an… More
  We Are Very Concerned, For The Wrong Reasons. If your questioning, in the age of remakes in which we live, how can one make a good remake of a bad film, the answer is 'The Omen'. It is a horror with fair performances from an surprisingly varied cast, fascinating story and an scary visuals creating a creepy mood and atmosphere, more than can be said of the original. Better than the 1976 version, but still not a great film, horror or otherwise. The chill factor remains medium, with the exception of the frightfully scary Mrs. Bradock, played by the actress of horror Mia Farrow.

• Dean M

  
  This remake horror film was alike the version between <i>End of Days</i> and <i>Final Destination 3</i>. Looked more terrifying and I haven't seen the original one yet, that's true. Director John Moore has thrown in a little more gore and a few… More
  This remake horror film was alike the version between <i>End of Days</i> and <i>Final Destination 3</i>. Looked more terrifying and I haven't seen the original one yet, that's true. Director John Moore has thrown in a little more gore and a few subliminal shocks - and there are a range of succulently hammy turns from the likes of Pete Postlethwaite and Mia Farrow (nodding to her starring role in the same era?s <i>Rosemary?s Baby</i>) but for the most part has followed the original screenplay with uncanny slavishness. Horror remake of Richard Donner's 1976 <i>The Omen</i>.

• Cassandra M

  
  This remake is like listening to a cover version of a Beatles song. You like it but really want to hear the original again. The original Omen is such a terrific film, convincing, beautifully cast and with a great, raw Brit Gothic feel to it. The remake is a slightly glossier affair… More
  This remake is like listening to a cover version of a Beatles song. You like it but really want to hear the original again. The original Omen is such a terrific film, convincing, beautifully cast and with a great, raw Brit Gothic feel to it. The remake is a slightly glossier affair which is enjoyable enough but doesn't really take the story in any new directions, although it hints that it will. Opening images of 9/11 and the Asian tsunami promise a new take on the tale, but with the exception of the very final scene, this doesn't really happen. The set pieces of the original were beautifully done - here they're well done but don't seem to last long enough; they don't feel 'special' enough. The cast is good but, again, it lacks the gravitas of the original. This ambassador is no Gregory Peck. Overall, this isn't a bad way to spend two hours in the cinema - it's a hundred times better and more cinematic than New Moon for instance - but could have been a lot more than it is.

• Conner R

  
  I thought this was actually a really well done remake. It looked beautiful and is just an improvement on the original. Liev Schreiber and Mia Farrow were just amazing and everyone else was good too. I think that at the core, the idea is really disturbing in the fact that the villain… More
  I thought this was actually a really well done remake. It looked beautiful and is just an improvement on the original. Liev Schreiber and Mia Farrow were just amazing and everyone else was good too. I think that at the core, the idea is really disturbing in the fact that the villain is a seemingly harmless child. How can you kill your son? How can you be sure of anything when it is someone you have loved their entire life? A great question that I think is basically answered in: you can if it's the anti-christ.

• Anthony L

  
  It?s a rubbish remake of a fantastic film. It does not improve on the story in any way. It does have some good turns by Thewlis, Farrow & Postlethwaite but they are fighting a losing battle when up against a talentless director, a kid that isn't scary and the pain to watch… More
  It?s a rubbish remake of a fantastic film. It does not improve on the story in any way. It does have some good turns by Thewlis, Farrow & Postlethwaite but they are fighting a losing battle when up against a talentless director, a kid that isn't scary and the pain to watch that is, Julia Stiles. Stop remaking and make something new!!!!

• Jason O

  
  Pretty creepy, this coming out on 6-6-06, eh? I saw this version before I saw the original, and much much prefer it to that one. Excellent remake, and the boy is much more convincing than the one in the '76 film. Great effects with a fascinating story. Love how you can see… More
  Pretty creepy, this coming out on 6-6-06, eh? I saw this version before I saw the original, and much much prefer it to that one. Excellent remake, and the boy is much more convincing than the one in the '76 film. Great effects with a fascinating story. Love how you can see who's going to die soon and how they're going to die. Sad thing is, I could see something like this happening in real life, but I hope not!

• Film C

  
  This is a watchable movie ! Its entertaining enough if not slightly boring in places although a bit creepy its not a great horror! its worth a watch just to watch Thewlis and Schriber!

• Nicki M

  
  I had heard this was a lot worse than it actually was. Of course the original was better, when is that ever not the case?, but this was okay for a remake. My main problems with it were that it kind of looked like a music video at times and Julie Stiles, (who I'm a fan off),… More
  I had heard this was a lot worse than it actually was. Of course the original was better, when is that ever not the case?, but this was okay for a remake. My main problems with it were that it kind of looked like a music video at times and Julie Stiles, (who I'm a fan off), just looks way too young to have a son Damien's age. The acting is fine and it's a good story.

• Bruce B

  
  Another Omen Movie, Not as good as the older versions but still pretty good with some outstanding scenes. Scene where priest gets the rod plunged through him is pretty intense. And Julia Stiles is nothing short of beautiful. This is a weeknight nothing else to do or watch movie. 3 1/2… More
  Another Omen Movie, Not as good as the older versions but still pretty good with some outstanding scenes. Scene where priest gets the rod plunged through him is pretty intense. And Julia Stiles is nothing short of beautiful. This is a weeknight nothing else to do or watch movie. 3 1/2 stars that?s all I can give it.

• Luke B

  
  Why? Why present a remake so faithful it almost shot for shot and word for word. Even terrible dialogue such as "She's pregnant" " I'm afraid not" remains. Coming from a doctor in todays day and age that is pretty disgraceful. Why not just stick your… More
  Why? Why present a remake so faithful it almost shot for shot and word for word. Even terrible dialogue such as "She's pregnant" " I'm afraid not" remains. Coming from a doctor in todays day and age that is pretty disgraceful. Why not just stick your tongue out and go "Na na nee na na". The "updates" include an internet link replacing a newspaper and the tricycle now becoming a scooter. Where before Damian was creepy and evil hidden behind young innocence, here the film tries so hard to slap you across the face with him being the son of the devil. He is pale, really pale, has cold dead eyes and a haircut from the 70's version. On the plus side the acting is brilliant and at times improves on the original. Schreiber especially is a realistic father and ambassador who plays his emotions close to his chest. Stiles, Thewlis, Farrow are all great so it's a shame they are not given some new and interesting material to tackle. The film also looks good, brimming with a grim and bleak atmosphere and aesthetic that supports the story with all its might. It will be a pointless watch for those that have seen the original but should be above other horror for new comers.

• Brian D

  
  Painful and pointless shot for shot remake just go back to the 1976 version so much better!

• William S

  
  The original just pisses all over this bland and pointless remake. But it does have it's moments: Mia Farrow is great as Mrs Baylock - a much more subtle and insinuating performance compared to Billie Whitelaw's outrageous histrionics. And although Lee Remmick's… More
  The original just pisses all over this bland and pointless remake. But it does have it's moments: Mia Farrow is great as Mrs Baylock - a much more subtle and insinuating performance compared to Billie Whitelaw's outrageous histrionics. And although Lee Remmick's dramatic demise was truly terrifying in the original (forever so ingrained in my subconscious that I can never pull a shirt off over my head without seeing Billie Whitelaw's menacing visage!) the murder by lethal injection is truly horrific because of it's quiet terror - rather like a tarantula creeping beneath the sheets! Apart from that, it's pretty much a pale copy of the original (camp?) classic.

• Summer W

  
  The remake? passable, but go for the original.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings