The Omen (2006)

Director:

John Moore

Writer (WGA):

David Seltzer (written by)

Release Date:

6 June 2006 (USA)

Genre:

Horror | Thriller

Tagline:

His Day Will Come

Plot:

A remake of the 1976 horror classic The Omen (1976), an American official realizes that his young son may literally be the devil incarnate.

Plot Keywords:

Priest | Photographer | Church | Evil | Suicide

Awards:

5 nominations

Cast

Predrag Bjelac	...	Vatican Observatory Priest (as Pedja Bjelac)
Carlo Sabatini	...	Cardinal Fabretti
Bohumil Svarc	...	Pope
Liev Schreiber	...	Robert Thorn
Giovanni Lombardo Radice	...	Father Spiletto
Baby Zikova	...	Damien - Newborn
Baby Morvas	...	Damien - Newborn
Baby Muller	...	Damien - Newborn
Baby Litera	...	Damien - Newborn
Julia Stiles	...	Katherine Thorn
Tomas Wooler	...	Damien - 2 Years Old (as Tomas Wooller)
Rafael Sallas	...	Rome Embassy Marine
Marshall Cupp	...	Ambassador Steven Haines
Martin Hindy	...	Haines' Limo Driver (as Martin 'Mako' Hindy)
Seamus Davey-Fitzpatrick	...	Damien

Also Known As:

The Omen 666 (USA) (working title)

MPAA:

Rated R for disturbing violent content, graphic images and some language.

Runtime:

110 min | Philippines:105 min (cut)

Country:

USA

Language:

English | Italian

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Sound Mix:

DTS | SDDS | Dolby Digital

Certification:

UK:15 | Finland:K-15 | Ireland:15A | Germany:16 | Malaysia:18PL | Philippines:R-13 | Norway:15 | Australia:MA | Switzerland:16 (canton of Vaud) | Switzerland:16 (canton of Geneva) | Argentina:16 | Hungary:18 | Italy:VM14 | Denmark:15 | South Korea:18 | Hong Kong:IIB | Singapore:PG (cut version) | USA:R (certificate #42658) | France:-12 | Sweden:15 | Netherlands:16 | Singapore:M18 | Portugal:M/16 | Iceland:16 | New Zealand:R16 | Brazil:16 | Japan:R-15 | South Korea:15 (cable rating)

Filming Locations:

Congress Center, Prague 4, Prague, Czech Republic

Company:

Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation

Trivia:

Throughout the movie, director John Moore uses the color red to signal a supernatural event, much like 'M. Knight Shyamalan' (although more proliferate) in The Sixth Sense (1999).

Goofs:

Factual errors: When Thorn and the photographer arrive in Megido they're stopped at an Israeli check point, but the Israeli army doesn't use the German style helmets used by the US Army and other armies.

Quotes:

Katherine Thorn: What's the matter, those other kids didn't want to play with you?
Damien: They're afraid...

Movie Connections:

References Don't Look Now (1973)

Soundtrack:

A DOCTOR, PLEASE

Recommended For Those Who Haven't Seen The Original

For those who never saw the original, this is a good movie. It's intense, nicely photographed with excellent surround sound, and capably acted.

For those of us who watched the original in 1976, the one that starred Gregory Peck and Lee Remick, we have to ask, "What is the point of watching this?" For us - at least most of us - the original is superior, but not by a wide margin, to be fair. I have no problem with remakes if they are not cheaply presented and I was entertained by this presentation even though I knew the story.

As an admirer of the '76 movie, my main objection to this was the casting, and mainly with two women: Julia Stiles as "Katherine Thorn" and Mia Farrow as "Mrs. Baylock." Stiles is a competent actress but she has a face that could pass for 15 or 16. At least Lee Remick looked the part: the wife of a mid-30s American diplomat. Farrow has the same problem in here: too soft (and pretty) a face and voice to be playing an evil nurse. Perhaps Mia has a fondness for films about the devil, dating back to "Rosemary's Baby in 1968, but she was totally miscast. Billie Whitelaw, in the original version, oozed evil in her role, and was genuinely frightening, something Farrow didn't come close to being in here.

Liev Schreiber, meanwhile, had the unenviable task of supplanting Gregory Peck. Schreiber can't be faulted for not having Peck's film presence, but his character in here is such a downer that he almost has an evil countenance himself. I don't remember Peck playing this character so unsympathetically. Stiles, too, has a character that wasn't as pleasing as Remick's.

This film seems to emphasize the couple's lack of spiritualness more so than the previous film. I may be wrong, but I don't remember Peck going to these lengths to give his bias against religion, nor do I recall Remick wanting an abortion, nor do I remember the priest saying "I'll see you in hell, Mr. Thorn." Perhaps they did, and I just don't recall. No priest, by the way, would act like that, except in the movies, nor would any cleric look and act as goofy as the ones in here.

In both films, the theology is laughable - pure Hollywood, and the priests in here are, too, being clueless about what "grace" and "the cross" are all about. Filmmakers generally won't deal with those topics, but they do a good job in making a case for Satan, I'll give them that. You saw a similar instance of this in "The Exorcist."

As for the other characters, the young boy - who has no dialog - is similar to the boy in the original but a little less evil-looking and David Thewlis in this movie did an excellent job as the photographer, as did David Warner in the first movie. Overall, I thought the first film was creepier than this one, but since I was already familiar with the story prior to watching this, a comparison may be unfair.

It was interesting to see this with the updated technology both off (digital surround sound, etc.) and on the screen (laptop computers, cell phones, etc.) but the story is still similar enough that owning both of these films is questionable. Given the choice, I would stick with the 1976 film, but - I repeat: if you've never seen "The Omen," this movie is recommended. It's entertaining, that's for sure.