Konterr
Brilliant and touching
Paynbob
It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.
Edwin
The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
robertmaybeth
If you're trying to decide whether you should spend time watching this movie, my answer is an unqualified "Yes" - just not THIS Omen, but the 1976 original. While not truly terrifying, except perhaps to young children, the original is edgy enough, and takes itself seriously enough (but not too seriously) to make it creepy enough for adults. Why am I talking about the original here, because this remake is a flat out waste of time, and if the topics of the film (satan's child etc.) is compelling enough to want to watch, it should be the original and not this one.Anyway, I'm sure every other reviewer has pointed out the flaws in this remake in detail without me rehashing them. I was expecting nothing when I started watching this remake, and sadly that's exactly what I got from it. Forget it unless you like having your intelligence insulted for two hours.
Leofwine_draca
As remakes go, this one of THE OMEN isn't half bad. It's well shot, with an attractive colour palette and good stunts to recommend it. Technical aspects are superior and a Macro Beltrami score adds to the experience. There are some quite horrific moments and some decent performances in the cast. Live Schreiber, an actor who I've never liked much, acquits himself well in the role of Robert Thorn; he's no Gregory Peck, but he makes a decent job of it. Julia Stiles is less assured in a somewhat bland turn as the put-upon mother, but the supporting cast make up for this. There's a raving Michael Gambon in a cameo role; a scary Mia Farrow, ageless and reminiscent of her role in ROSEMARY'S BABY as the creepy nanny, a scene-stealing Pete Postlethwaite as the mad priest, and best of all, a mannered and well-crafted turn from David Thewlis as the photographer played by David Warner in the original (Thewlis matches Warner's performance measure for measure).My main complaint, as with so many remakes, is that this one follows the original too closely. A couple of deaths are changed, but for the most part it's exact. Where's the fun in that? Why couldn't we have had a happy ending for a change? Nevertheless, this OMEN is a good film, and very much better than OMEN IV, the last sequel before this. Some of the deaths are inventive and pleasantly shocking, and the new decapitation doesn't disappoint. Sometimes things threaten to get a bit like FINAL DESTINATION but for the most part this rises above the rest as a good, old fashioned horror thriller.
GL84
After several years of raising his son, a US diplomat comes to believe that he's adopted the son of the Antichrist and must try to stop those who are intent on letting his demonic legacy come to fruition.Overall this may be a pointless but surprisingly watchable effort. The fact that this is a remake of the original and doesn't do anything drastically new to the proceedings is definitely the biggest flaw, since this one practically copies the original's plot as well as whole scenes straight from there. This gives the film the feeling of redundancy as it once again shows the couple's son dying in birth, the secretive adoption and the ensuring career change all coming from the original's plot verbatim. As well, the fact that this one features scenes like the arrival at the church, the disastrous birthday party, the tricycle attack and even the scenes of the two retracing the clues of the apocalypse get carried over from the original and manages to feature them shot-for-shot in the new version without deviation, furthering the ties of familiarity here between the two versions. More to the point, both of these issues combine together against this one being so predicable and unnecessary that really hold this one down and make it quite a troublesome effort here when on a fundamental level the effort is challenging to get through. That does make for enough here to hold off the few positives on display which are quite surprising throughout here. The one thing this one gets right is the build-up between the religious prophecies and the actual evil within here, as the opening montage of real-world tragedies leads nicely into the sequences in the first half which signify something is happening. As the coincidences begin piling up and painting a darker picture it becomes all the more obvious and that's quite an enjoyable feat. Likewise, the frantic finale packs a lot of action into this one by really amping up the pacing of events which is much higher at this point despite showcasing the film's fast-paced action at its best, much like it accomplished throughout the rest of this in order to really make for a watchable effort with the pacing in here. Otherwise, it's not all that bad of an effort.Rated R: Graphic Violence, some Language and intense demonic themes.
utgard14
Virtual scene-for-scene remake of the 1976 Omen film with the 21st century music video gloss that passes for cinematography now. That this was made by the same director who would later do the awful Max Payne and A Good Day to Die Hard should come as no surprise. John Moore is a director more focused on making a film look good than actually be good.Did The Omen need to be remade? Of course not but such is the nature of the business. Before I start going on a diatribe about that, I'd better get back to this film and what's good or bad about it. What's good: some nicely staged scenes, but nothing particularly creative or original. For a director so obsessed with visuals, Moore offers little to improve upon the original's film's creative death set pieces. He just copies them. How creatively bankrupt is this man? As for the bad: the movie is plodding, unoriginal, often boring with no suspense or scares worth mentioning. Will viewers unfamiliar with the original film feel the same way? I think so unless these viewers are just generally unfamiliar with movies altogether. The cast is nothing to write home about. Julia Stiles tries and Liev Schrieber is dull as mud. Mia Farrow does fine with a performance that, judging by some of the praise I've seen, is a tad overrated.Overall, it's yet another misfire remake of a superior film. Do yourself a favor and see the original instead. If you already have seen the original, watch something else. Something new or something old you haven't seen before. Just not another crappy horror remake.
