Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2010) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
180 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Not much need to be afraid of this remake
inkleinedpuncture27 August 2011
Pros: beautiful scenery/sets, a few good jumps, and about 5-10 minutes of eerie atmosphere

Cons: not very scary, too much CGI'd gremlins, and a very predictable/slow plot

Conclusion: rent the original and skip this remake

The much anticipated, by me, remake of the 1973 made for TV movie of the same name left me feeling extremely disappointed. The plot was fairly simple. A young girl Sally (Bailee Madison) moves in with her father Alex (Guy Pearce) and his girlfriend Kim (Katie Holmes), into a house Alex and Kim are fixing up to sell. Soon upon arriving, adventurous Sally discovers the house has a basement and that the family is not alone. The basement's fireplace is inhabited by little CGI'd creatures that terrorize the family, especially Sally. The actors I felt all did an adequate job playing their parts, especially young Sally (Bailee Madison), who played a convincingly cynical little girl fed up with being 'sold' by her mother to live with her father. Overall the movie was very predictable and offered very few scary moments. The creatures from the original, people dressed in little goblin costumes, were sparingly showed. I think it was way more effective than the over-shown little gremlins in this movie, which looked to me like Chihuahuas that could speak. Save your money and skip this one!
113 out of 161 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
House of Gothicism
alexart-19 August 2011
Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is exactly the kind of horror movie you want to hate. It's a remake, it involves a child in peril, and it contains some (and I say "some") very nasty violence. Just watch--you'll have trouble hating it.

Guillermo del Toro's new collaborative effort with first-time director Troy Nixey is, simply put, horror done right. There's a lot here that can be found in any horror movie that comes out now, but this one succeeds for relying on tone and setting rather than blood and guts. The acting from all three leads is surprisingly good, and Nixey shines as well behind the camera.

However, at the heart of the film is a ballsy story co-written by del Toro that really keeps the film stable. Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is originally based on a 1973 British TV movie that has been hailed as one of the scariest movies ever made. The remake features a new main character: Sally, a child, played by Bailee Madison. Sally moves into a new Gothic mansion with her father (Guy Pearce) and a new stepmother (Katie Holmes). There, she discovers a ventilation system where she hears breathy voices calling to play with her. At first, the voices are friendly. Then, they're vicious and violent.

The violence of the movie is one of the reasons why this movie succeeds so nicely. The first scene is grisly and is, without a doubt, the reason why Don't Be Afraid of the Dark earned its R-rating rather than its intended PG-13. There isn't constant violence. In fact, there isn't even that much of it. Most of it is bloodless, but all of it is enough to make us squeamish and afraid.

Another area in which the movie excels in that respect is its design. The mansion that Nixey and del Toro chose is gorgeous. The intense lighting, which Nixey noted as "inspired by Rembrandt" in the Q&A following the film, is moody and adds to the heavy tone of the movie. The house is just creepy on its own, but it becomes creepier thanks to the creature design. Unlike what the trailer tells you, the creatures are pretty tiny. What creeped me out about them was the loud, shrill screeches they let out. It'll give you chills. Keep a keen ear and listen for del Toro, as he voices a few of the creatures.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is a very fun and very creepy horror movie experience. Though not without its flaws, it has a strong story stabilized by good characters and a surprisingly dark ending, and it's got some good acting too. It's hard not to be absorbed in the mesmerizing light pools of the mansion, and it's even harder not to be entertained. As usual in del Toro films, darkness and unseen monsters reign, and as usual, it's pretty damn unnerving.
176 out of 277 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A real missed opportunity
zoydbond2 October 2011
Well. Where to start?

This is a film that starts badly, and save two relatively well executed scenes, gets worse. If you have seen the original seventies TV movie you will be sorely disappointed. What made the original frightening was the bareness of the plot, the ordinariness of the location and the bleakness of the ending. All of these elements have been removed. The story is over written, the location of overly ornate, and the ending, although quite nasty, is not as disturbing as it should have been. Add to this the frankly deplorable CGI and iffy direction. Well...

The kid is good though (that's where the 4 points comes from)

Verdict: Don't be afraid of avoiding don't be afraid of the dark
44 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Soon descends into CGI nonsense
Leofwine_draca15 October 2013
The idea behind DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK has potential. It's a remake of one of those classic 1970s TV horrors with Guillermo del Toro as one of the scriptwriters, no less. It starts off with potential, featuring a leading role from Guy Pearce (always a favourite) and some great set design and dressing in the form of a huge, crumbling old mansion complete with hidden rooms and passageways.

And slowly, bit by bit, the potential ebbs away, leaving this a soulless and artificial experience. It ends up being overexposed and under-written, a jumble of pointless scare sequences and endless CGI nonsense as the inhabitants of the household are repeatedly put at the mercy of some unwelcome critters. In some ways it's like a modern day GREMLINS, and it has a very childish feel to it despite the adult rating. There are parallels to other del Toro fare like PAN'S LABYRINTH but this is nowhere near that kind of calibre. The only thing it makes me want to do is track down the original.

The film I most likened it to was, in fact, an obscure early '90s B-movie called LITTLE DEVILS: THE BIRTH, which was much better in terms of pure, unashamed fun - the effects were better too. DON'T BE AFRAID OF THE DARK is just lazy, with cheesy CGI and only one good scare all the way through. Finally, the cast is underwhelming: Pearce is a sleepwalker, Katie Holmes embarrassed, and Bailee Madison once of the most irritating child actors I've seen in a while. Still, at least Pearce got to team up with NEIGHBOURS' Alan Dale (aka Jim Robinson) for a couple of scenes...
17 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Nothing To Be Afraid Of
josephbrando21 September 2011
When I first heard about the plot of the "Don't Be Afraid Of The Dark" remake, I was disappointed that they decided to add the unnecessary element of a child to the story. Ironically, the portrayal of the daughter by Bailee Madison was one of the few highlights this movie had to offer. With all the creepy Gothic imagery, spiderwebs and shadows, this movie failed to create any of the suspense generated by the fairly moderate surroundings of the original. The CGI demons were absolutely ridiculous, and with complete certainty I can state that the raisin- faced-doll demons of the 40-year-old original TV movie were much creepier. Katie Holmes, although likable, must be one of the world's worst actresses, unable of conjuring up any emotion other then a perky turned up nose for all occasions. It is truly remarkable to see her constantly upstaged by the child actress in this film who forces you to believe everything she is feeling. I can only recommend this as a starter horror film for young children, or background TV while you pay your bills online - you won't miss anything.
85 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
All beauty and no brains
CrazyCurlsChica3 September 2011
The scenery of the film is breath-taking. The house is exquisite, and as always, del Toro does an immaculate job creating an ominous and foreboding mood. The scares in this movie are well thought out and are not the cheap thrills Hollywood has come to depend on, and the film did a good job building momentum.

However, that being said, the plot and its lack of logicality stop the film dead in its tracks. The stupidity of the film goes beyond the typical, "No, don't go in there!" that one typically expects in a horror film. The ridiculousness of the characters' actions makes this film frustrating and near impossible to appreciate.

I saw this film because I love "haunted house" films, I'm an old Katie Holmes fan from her Dawson's Creek Days, and I think Bailee Madison is adorable, and therefore, I'm awarding one point for each redeeming quality in the movie - 1) awesome scenery, 2) Katie Holmes, and 3) Bailee Madison.
39 out of 57 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't Be Afraid of the Dark Movie Review
staff-577-37888226 August 2011
Every so often a movie comes along that changes an entire genre and becomes something more than just movie, but this is not that movie. Don't Be Afraid of the Dark is a remake of a 1970's film of the same name. Guillermo Del Toro, famous for Pan's Labyrinth, brings us this modern update along with new director Troy Nixey. The movie tells the story of a young girl named Sally that moves in with her architect father and girlfriend Kim who are remodeling an old mansion. Soon after arriving the girl opens a doorway that unleashes a group of small monsters that attempt to kidnap her and eat her teeth!

First thing I should tell you is that the movie isn't that scary. What the movie focuses on instead is telling a good story that relies heavily on atmosphere. One of the best parts of the film is the mansion that they life in. What's interesting is how the mansion is treated almost like a character in that with all the construction that the mansion is undertaking, it changes throughout the movie. Starting from as an old building that holds secrets to a completely renovated mansion that is more than what it seems. From a comfy lit room to a dim lit nightmare, the mansion becomes the perfect set piece. I must give credit to the director for the attention to detail in every set and the eerie coldness that the movie makes you feel.

The acting is good but nothing to write home about. Katie Holmes does a fine job playing Kim, the interior decorator and love interest. Guy Pearce does an amazing job playing a father you really want to strangle at the end of the movie and Bailee Madison does a good job playing Sally. The little creatures, which are all CG done look fantastic in the film, which is something expected when I see the name Guillermo Del Toro attached to the film.

While everything sounds good and great and the movie does a great job at being a good classic horror movie with the usual or unusual twist ending, I still have a problem with the movie that is more an issue with the genre. That problem I have stems from the utter stupidity from the characters in the film. If some little monsters try and attack you or someone you know why wouldn't you do everything in your power to stay away from the house or at the very least be with someone at all times? Why is it that once everything is going to hell that all the characters decide to split up instead of forming a party? I mean seriously, it just pains me to believe that all these characters could be so very stupid. You know the little monsters are there but you still decide it would be a great idea to take a shower at night? Seriously?

OK, I think my little rant is done. Overall I enjoyed the film even though I am not a big fan of horror movies and I think that if you want to see a horror film is that more creepy than scary than Don't Be Afraid of the Dark will satisfy your needs.

Written by Steve Cienfuegos for
43 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't be afraid of the rating!
Kennn4229 December 2020
Don't agree with the many negative reviews . The movie is enjoyable and Del Torro creates a nice atmosphere. Acting is on par also. The many negative reviews are unjustified and the movie is better than 90% of the stupid horror movies with cheap special effects out there. And this comes from a horror fsn.! Definitely worth watching!
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
like a comedy was advertised as a horror
MikesIDhasbeentaken5 March 2012
I saw the adverts, and thought 'this looks good!' What i didn't know, was that the adverts covered what the actual film was about, and when, while watching the film, you find out what the monsters are, I almost laughed.

Tiny little half pint sized sprites struggling to hold up nail clippers on the attack! it is probably the only 'haunted house' film i've seen where i'd think, i'll buy it anyway, and set some mouse traps down in the basement, problem solved.

I've not seen the original of this film, and i'm sure this film has ruined the original series, and will try to watch with an open mind. This film tho, very disappointing, considering the trailers looked so promising.
17 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't Be Afraid to see something else.
ryleyemenaker30 August 2011
Although Katie Holmes and Bailee Madison play their parts as daughter and step mom very well. Guy Pearce lacks the skill of a father. This could just be the Writers/Directors for making him this way. This movie lacks a back story unless I missed it with the flying words at the beginning, they are missing part of the story. While you sit there in your seat waiting for someone to know or find out what to do, you become disappointed with the actions they make. This movie is Rated R, that doesn't mean you will get to see something with the camera always jumping away from the action you will feel like you missed it, but you didn't, they just didn't show it. This is one of the movies that when you leave, you ask your self "What? How? and Why?"
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
more of the same!
willdavis691 September 2011
It's funny but in the 1970s and 80s I don't recall Hollywood constantly remaking horror films from the 40's and 50's and when it was done it was done pretty well 1978s Invasion of the body snatchers and 1982s The Thing come to mind. But since the new millennium it seems the only offerings from the horror genre have been pointless remakes to smart and SCARY classics from yesteryear. We had to revisit the likes of The step ford wives, A nightmare on elm st.,Halloween I AND II,Black Christmas,Friday the 13TH, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre,When a stranger calls, The Fog, The Amityville Horror,Hills Have Eyes,The Hitcher,Last house on the left,Dawn of the Dead, another body snatcher remake The Invasion and in the late 90s remakes of Psycho and The Haunting and not to mention the almost blasphemous remake of The Omen! The formula is always the same take an intelligent blockbuster, recast it with a politically correct ensemble(usually with arrogant, annoying teens),saturate it with play station worthy cgi effects and rewrite it so that it's familiar to an MTV/reality show audience with the attention span of a fly. And I'm sure there are more on the way....When is Hollywood gonna produce an original horror script that doesn't insult my intelligence? After all isn't that why they're paid millions and millions of dollars? Don't be afraid of the dark is no exception to these new rules and frankly from this writer and director I expected better. The 1973 creepy original which terrified me as a child starred Kim Darby as a young wife who inherits a gloomy mansion infested with demonic creatures and cannot get her executive husband Jim Hutton to believe her despite warnings from an ominous handy man. This version centers naturally around a young girl instead of a young wife (hence the annoying arrogant teen, kid rule) and a back story (hence the rewritten to the Mtv/reality/dancing with stars attention span crowd) the bottom line if an original is a known as a "classic" always stick with the original, if they must make remakes remake a crappy film and make that one better not vice versa believe me there are enough to choose from or remake a film that is not well known what Gauls me the most is todays young audiences are being jipped into thinking that some of todays garbage are the originals. If this trend continues I suppose in 2040 there will be remakes of Saw,Insidious,Silent Hill,Hostile and the 2040 generations will think they're the real deal. Please don't let my rant prevent you from making up your own mind we all have different tastes if you wanna go see it and if you enjoy it, dandy , this is simply one humble mans opinion.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't Be Afraid of Negative Reviews! See the movie!
davecsanders27 August 2011
Like Guillermo del Toro and countless other kids, I saw the original Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (1973) on TV and lost some sleep to visions of goblins in the midnight shadows. This remake pays perfect tribute to its anscestor film, while reinventing the story with the dark fairy tale depth which del Toro is known for. The director, Troy Nixey, avoids pointless gore or boo scenes, using his cinematic tools wisely to build toward the inevitable critical mass. The creators of the film realize it is not the shock of things we see, but rather what is implied and left to imagination. Like the best horror films, simple elements blend to evoke emotions. Shadows swirl against a mansion as eerie as the Overlook Hotel, and the perfectly cast trio of Sally (Bailee Madison), Kim (Katie Holmes), and Alex (Guy Pearce) endure torments therein. Much has already been made of amazing young Bailee Madison and Pearce is solid as a man driven by career pressure, but Holmes--not a favorite of mine--is surprisingly agile in the role of the awkward girlfriend. Much like Naomi Watts in The Ring (2002), she plays a believable protector. Marco Beltrami's music sounds old school and builds up the Gothic art and sets well. The cinematography by Oliver Stapleton is dark and at times borders on dank and drab, but serves the story well. I would not ruin the succulent scares with spoilers, but suffice to say that the creators manage to expand the tale by linking the wicked imps of the movie to folklore and traditions (tooth fairies). Key scenes, such as a dinner, are clear homages to the original, and the finale pays the piper with Grimm satisfaction. Despite sometimes weak CGI, this movie honors its creepy roots with style. Other reviews have been moderate to harsh, and I suspect the reviewers expected something more akin to Pan's Labyrinth. Nevertheless, if you like crafty and creepy horror films, see Don't Be Afraid of the Dark in a dark theater!
18 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Lame Screenplay, Despite the Participation of Guillermo del Toro
claudio_carvalho18 February 2012
In Rhode Island, the interior designers Alex (Guy Pearce) and his girlfriend Kim (Katie Holmes) welcome Alex's nine year daughter Sally (Bailee Madison) that was sent by her mother to live with Alex. The couple brings Sally to the manor of the painter Emerson Blackwood (Garry McDonald), who had disappeared with his son many years ago, and Alex has invested all his money in the mansion expecting to be promoted in his business with the restoration of the house.

Sally rejects Kim and feels lonely in the mansion and while walking on the real estate, she finds that the manor has a hidden basement. Alex's employee William Harris (Jack Thompson), who is a descendant of Blackwood, warns Sally to never go to the basement but the girl overhears voices in the ash pit calling her. However Sally brings a wrench and removes the bolts of the ash pit cover. Sooner Sally finds that evil creatures that fear the light have escaped from the underground through the ash pit and are threatening her. However, Alex and Kim believe that it is only her imagination.

"Don't Be Afraid of the Dark" is a remake of a 1973 film that I have never seen. The cinematography and the performance of the girl Bailee Madison are great. Unfortunately the lame screenplay has many plot holes and, for example, the disappearance of Kim and the weird events that the guests have witnessed have no consequence in the end of the story.

The DVD has interviews and behind stage footages and it is visible the interference of Guillermo del Toro in the direction. Unfortunately his participation is not enough to save this film. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "Não Tenha Medo do Escuro" ("Don't Be Afraid of the Dark")
16 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Don't Be Afraid of the Computer Generated Minions of the Anti-Christ
anthonyadamo12 July 2012
At first, I thought this movie was directed by Guillermo Del Toro, and it disappointed me that it wasn't. I did see a lot of the influence he had on Troy Nixey with his camera-work, framing and look of the picture. I did not like the movie though. It wasn't scary, it wasn't interesting, it didn't keep me on the edge of my seat, etc. It tied-in every cliché horror movie story point, from: moving into a creepy new old house, neglectful father, his new girlfriend, a misplaced child who sees things, the people don't believe her until it's too late, the people that live there that know what's going on but don't say give me a break. And Del Toro was nominated for an Oscar for Best Screenplay on Pan's Labyrinth, so you'd think the story would be a little deeper. How is anyone supposed to be scared of these "rat demons"? The visual effects were horrible, the story was stupid, and the only reason I'm not failing this move is because I like Del Toro, Holmes and Pearce, so I'll give them a second chance...but not a third!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Could have been good
olson-6484810 November 2019
It's a great, if overdone concept, but every frame, every scene, feels like a rehearsal. It's like they only did one take of everything and thought that was the best they would get. The script itself wasn't bad, but the performances were so awful it deminishes anything that could have been. I can't say it enough, this film is like a first take. Something that should have been cut for better performances. Just terribly mundane and underwhelming. And who the out that awful wig on that child? Just poor exicution, sadly.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Worst Guillermo del toro production.
makusu_max31 August 2014
While the concept was alright, the crew producing the movie was excellent, the execution was horrible.

The characters never use COMMON SENSE whatsoever. And I know many people lack it, but it gets way too ridiculous.

That one part the girl caught one, no one mentioned that at all.

There were too many parts that didn't add up to any realistic scenario and to me, that killed most of it's little contribution to horror films.

The dad is a total moron.

The people get "knocked up" and wake up coincidentally at specific moments, even if they get shaken up or stuff happens that should wake em up anyway.

The critters are fun but I believe they're executed with a WANKERey attitude. These could be used much better than this crap.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Beautiful Sets
magpie1314 July 2014
A Hollywood friend of mine once told me a story of a director who made a terrible movie with wonderful carpentry pieces. After the filming, the sets found their way into the director's custom-built home. I'm just saying.

This movie has some of the most beautiful carpentry I've ever seen in a film. Hand-carved doors, spiral staircases and parquet floors.

I love GDT but this is a low point for him. Treat yourself to "The Devil's Backbone" to see what GDT can do for horror films.

The original is one of the scariest movies I've ever seen. See it first.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
High on Hype, Low on Sustenance
dimarinc22 February 2012
I was excited to watch Don't Be Afraid of the Dark because I'm a fan of some of Guillermo Del Toro 's work, I love horror movies and I haven't seen Katie Holmes in a watchable movie in what feels like a decade. My suspicions were first peaked when the trailer for the movie was so short and uninformative. I understand this is a remake, but a little idea of what the plot is wouldn't kill you. After watching the movie, I was unsatisfied to say the least. I agree with everyone harping about plot holes and how things would've (and definitely should have) been done differently by characters in the movie. However, I kept having a feeling that a big event, or plateau was on the horizon and as the movie boringly plugged on, I realized i would be let down.

The movie did a decent job with the story it had. I almost felt like GDT started making the movie and got about 20 minutes in before he realized that the main idea in the movie wasn't very scary. However even if I put my logic and common sense behind and embrace the events of the movie, I still believe more was needed. If they were striving for tension, they got it, but tension in the viewer, anxiously awaiting something to finally happen in the movie. The movie began well and built up a great plot base, then fizzled and floundered.

I wouldn't really recommend this movie to anyone but die-hard horror fans. But even they would have standards too high for this movie. So maybe someone who just began liking the horror genre and hasn't seen any good movies yet.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
don't even bother spending 1 minute to watch this.. it's simply ridiculous!
MariaBrozou8 February 2012
just awful... don't waste your time watching I cannot understand for which reason would somebody bother shooting this film in the first place. It is not scary it's just stupid. I am very disappointed that I was fooled by the medium cast (usually I enjoy movies with at least 2 actors I know) to watch this and I was disappointed the least. I could even say annoyed for spending my time to watch this. Who would actually force their child to stay alone in a house that someone was recently killed? The most ridiculous part is that they don't really get shaken by this and the father barely takes part in the whole story. Even if your child was only afraid even of something imaginary you would not leave it alone. Would you? OK I understand the need to let the child alone to make the plot but maybe more imaginative reasons could be found. Even for the most science fiction movies you gotta make it a little bit believable in order to make it scary!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The trailer is better than this movie and it didn't show much for a reason
KineticSeoul6 February 2012
This movie is all about atmosphere or at least that is basically all it has going for it and even that isn't even that good. This is simply a very forgetful movie, it was like 2 days ago that I finished watching it and I almost forgot the whole movie. The main reason I decided to check this movie out was because the trailer made it seem like it would have potential and because it has Guillermo Del Toro as the writer. This movie was a waste of time, I had to stop this movie a few times to do something else cause it bored me that much. The whole movie is basically a build up and the climax was boring and the ending was very disappointing. This movie isn't scary at all which made the trailer so very misleading. And the antagonist aren't even intimidating and the characters just wasn't even all that likable. There was just nothing that stood out about them and they are forgetful characters. Just pass on this movie, not worth the time. There is just nothing positive about this movie for anyone to recommend to others.

2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Non Dark Worthless Exploitive Ridiculous
blandiefam27 January 2012
I love a great scary movie. It invigorates me and i get an excuse to squeeze close to my wife. I rented this movie and thought it would be a roller coaster of shock and horror. Instead, I was shouting at the screen about how stupid this feature was. I kept hoping a little sensibility would emerge from one or more of the characters. A hope to no avail. The original 1973 version was a great movie and I was hoping this one would utilize some of the techniques Del Toro is famous for. The plot made no sense and the reasoning and common sense was absent just as the AFRAID part. I sometimes marvel at how too much money and enough yes men could make a writer/director make such worthlessness. Holmes tried her best to really act through this dribble but all of the actions and reactions of the characters made you want to just burn the DVD. The creatures were over exposed so much it seemed they were afraid of the dark. The adults seemed to have had a pow wow to contrive the many ways they could leave this girl exposed to these creatures. I honestly do not see any redeeming value in any part of this film except for the opening sequence. A molar extraction is more pleasant than this experience.Hollywood should be ashamed of them selves.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not much of a horror flick
wyldeboyy25 January 2012
Not much of a "horror" movie except for a few good 'taken-by-surprise' moments. The plot is simple and I'd say this would make a good 'sleepover movie' for some 12 year old girls.

The locations are beautiful what ever said and done. Love the house and the garden.

Too much CGI and exposure of the creatures. They run about and expose themselves thus revealing a lot of themselves, making it look like one of those Disney's children's horror flicks, you know what I mean!

Acting is actually good. It's just the poor plot, plot holes and way too much CGI is what ruins the movie. Could have done a better job but nonetheless, this would make a good children's horror movie.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Neither meat nor fish
eryui19 January 2012
I do really can't classify this movie.

Is it for children? Really it look like it was, but no, a child could be scared also by those funny monsters.

Then is it for adults? Neither, an adult can't be scared by this at all.

There is horror? Almost nothing.

Is it a thriller? No.

Predictable? There is nothing to predict.

Is the plot any good? No, it's pretty childish.

Is the script any good? No, it's pretty basic.

Do you get in the main characters? No. They are uninteresting.

Is there any suspense? Not at all. Also because you know who are coming and they are funny too...

Do you feel any kind of emotions? Excited, fun, scared, disgusted? No, a part a single scene where the filmmakers (as always) pump up the volume and show you a ugly face. But you'll jump for the volume not the face.

Are the effect original? Nothing new, you have see them million time before. Computer graphic.

I saw this movie just cause i generally do like horror movie, but overall because i was reassured by the writer Guillermo del Toro and the actor Guy Pearce. To me, both failed this time. I gave this 3 and not 1 just for the guy who worked on the computer graphic to create those monsters.

So what's should be the audience for this movie? I really don't know. This is neither meat nor fish.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not scary
hknina11 January 2012
I didn't expect too much of this movie, but I was hoping for an interesting scary story or at least something to go "ooh!" about. Unfortunately, I found this movie to be quite boring, not at all scary and with no twists to spice it up. It had a promising start, but it's all downhill from there.... And it truly is annoying to see yet another scary movie where the characters do stupid things when they know something bad is going on, like being alone etc. Also, there was a lot of things that clearly would have be handled differently in real life, like no investigation of a bad "incident" etc, that just made it stupid. I didn't care much for the end either. Too scary for kids, too boring for adults?
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Ridiculous and empty
Sovereign_x200011 February 2012
The mere setting of this movie garnered me more unease than the so-called story line! Although the acting was truly uninspired and unconvincing, the dialog and lack of any sort realistic response to being confronted by the supernatural evil in the estate was the final straw. What infuriated me even more was the fact that the 1973 original of the same title did a masterful job of exploiting the eerie atmosphere and mystique of the "fairies". They were MUCH too visible in this flop. Another failure in the film is the glaring inconsistencies as it relates to the creatures fear of bright light and selective targeting of victims (see: the groundskeeper). There are SO many points in the movie where proof would be evident, but is apparently and blindly over looked. This movie insults anyone with any shred of common sense (like the grounds keeper's facial wounds being unbandaged and unwashed by the hospital staff). Avoid this flop of a movie unless you enjoy being bombarded by stupidity.
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed