Legendary filmmaker Sam Raimi and director Gil Kenan reimagine and contemporize the classic tale about a family whose suburban home is invaded by angry spirits. When the terrifying apparitions escalate their attacks and take the youngest daughter, the family must come together to rescue her.Written by
20th Century Fox
The movie was shot in the fall of 2013. See more »
(at around 1h 15 mins) In one scene Carrigan Burke and Eric Bowen are in the upstairs room with the portal and Carrigan is shouting to the spirits. The scene then cuts to the others downstairs then back upstairs and the two men are incapacitated on the ground. See more »
SPOILER: A scene is shown halfway through the end credits: Carrigan Burke is filming a new episode of his show. Dr. Powell (wearing the same glasses Tangina wore in the original trilogy) is his new co-host. He gets mad at her for messing up her line. See more »
In the UK channel 5 network premier version the movie has been formatted from 2:35.1 widescreen to 1:77.1 HDTV format See more »
I will say it from the beginning: regarding remakes of classic films, Poltergeist didn't end up being as bad as I expected. This doesn't mean it's very good, or necessary, or much less that it surpasses the original film; I just found it a mediocre but moderately entertaining horror film with a correct style for the new generations which would find difficult taking a 1982 movie seriously, with all the cultural relics implied by that... not to mention special effects which wouldn't look as impressive nowadays as they were for those of us who watched it 33 years ago. The screenplay of Poltergeist (2015) adds elements which modernize the story and omits details to simplify it (this time, there isn't a dog in the family, there isn't a subtle critic against the proliferation of suburbs and we don't have the "product placement" which wasn't only innovative in 1982, but also genuinely contributed to the nature of the house and its inhabitants). Some of the additions moderately work, while other ones feel forced... simple whims to prove it isn't an exact copy, and that screenwriter David Lindsay- Abaire attempted to "improve" it (without achieving it, of course). Among the positive changes, I would mention the electric disturbances which announce the presence of spirits (or the "poltergeist"), evoking the graphic style of the original film and also thematically complementing the affair of the ghost TV ("They're here"). The negative changes would require a long list, so I will just mention the "medium" (played by Jared Harris) who comes to clean the house; and we know he's qualified to do it because he has a reality show in which he investigates haunted sites. Harris is a good actor, but the character and the creative decision are horrible. Speaking of which, Poltergeist (2015) includes some excellent actors who considerably elevate the dramatic credibility: Sam Rockwell perfectly transmits the frustration of a family man in a bad economical situation; Rosemarie DeWitt brings conviction and has a good chemistry with Rockwell; and Jane Adams is completely credible as a paranormal investigator who takes her work seriously while having some doubts about its scientific validity. The youngsters Kennedi Clements, Saxon Sharbino and Kyle Catlett also make a good work in their roles, and the special effects don't darken the narrative... even though I think they show more than they should during the ending, ruining the mystery and spirituality behind the paranormal events suffered by the Bowen family. In conclusion, Poltergeist (2015) isn't a very good film, but it was better than I expected, and because of that, I can give it a slight recommendation exclusively to the ones who have never seen the original movie. Needless to say, it would be better if they watched it, but I don't want to ask for miracles. We already have enough with the fact that Poltergeist (2015) didn't end up being a disaster; in the niche of remakes, that can be considered a victory. A mediocre compliment, but a compliment after all.
22 of 41 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this