MovieChat Forums > Poltergeist (2015) Discussion > C'mon...Give me a break

C'mon...Give me a break

posted 9 years ago by ronargus
22 replies | jump to latest

I really hate it when the movie makers decide to remake a hit movie which actually doesn't even compare with the original 1st and 2nd one. What was really sad is the young girl who played Carol Ann (Heather O Rourke) passed away at the young age of 13. The first movie was centered on her as one of the main characters in that.I didn't check the ratings on it but it's probably 13+ who probably already saw the original movie. Give it a break Hollywood. Don't screw up a great movie with a weak remake.

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

The only thing you can accuse this movie of is false advertising. It's quite different from the original Poltergeist. So if you expect a blood curling intense nail biting horror movie then you'll be dissapoint.

But on it's own right it's awesome. More like Ghostbusters or Cabin in the Woods. Sam Raimi style.

This is imho a good remake because it doesn't try to just rehash the same old story in the same way just with modern actors and effects. It tries to do something different. It's ok if you don't like the movie but you can't really fault film makers for doing it completely different.

Just my 2 cents :)

[–] reggiecenteno-48001 9 years ago

I agree dejay

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

Hey I agree too ;)

[–] StarshineTwinkle 9 years ago

It was an insult to the original poltergeist film.

Meat is murder

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

It's definitely quite different. I could see how you could see it as an insult if you are expecting a movie like the original. I just like this style of film too.

[–] StarshineTwinkle 9 years ago

I was, I agree as a stand alone film it was ok, i'd watch it again, it's very polished and as a fan of the franchise I will get the extended bluray of the remake and hope it adds a litte extra.

I scored it 5/10.

I think I was just very dissapointed it didn't have heart of the original, the practical effects and was too rushed.

Meat is murder

[–] Phantasy_star_4 9 years ago

The movie was terrible, The people didn't even feel like a real family as the acting was so bad. I like Sam Rockwell but he was very one dimensional in this film. There is good reason why the original is so much better and im not just going on nostalgia here. Every single scene in the original was amazing, jaw dropping and scary as hell back when it came out. I was bored out of my mind with this movie, they definitely picked the wrong cast and it kind of dragged out for periods of time. People keep saying you could see this movie as a stand alone but no, you really cant say that as they used way to much of the original movies scenes (Major ones). Except in comparison to the first it was below standards. Now If I never saw the original would I like the new movie? I tried to put myself as a Teenager again watching this type of movie for the first time. I might like it a bit but I would never consider it a great movie. There are way to many others out there that Ive seen that are the same now.

Now if they made Poltergeist 2015 as a stand alone, had nothing to do with the original in terms of using the same script but had something to do with the first film (like some original cast might be in it) then that would be different, dont use the same scenes and pretend to come up with something new. Perhaps keep Sam rockwell but ditch the rest of the cast and replace. I dont mean to sound like an old person but I just watch lots of movies on the weekend at night, its a hobby over the years and Im so tired of remakes, continue the story another way or just leave it be. This movie 4/10.

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

I don't mind seeing the same story multiple times if it's told well and with a new take. People watch Shakespeare's plays over and over even if they know the story exactly. So remakes just have to be good and somewhat different.

Or maybe I'm less biased because it's been years since I've seen Poltergeist so I don't remember the scenes well. And I'm not very nostalgic about it.

Imho the acting was fine and the whole movie a bit "tongue in cheek".

[–] reggiecenteno-48001 9 years ago

Totally agree what u said dejay I dont mind seeing another remake of a move the secobd time if its awesome like with the upcoming Friday the 13th remake again from what I read sounds really good cant wait

[–] VWstarwars 9 years ago

Dude, I just saw this movie and it was AWFUL!!!!

It's not bad because it is not the original. It would suck regardless. The acting in this was atrocious! The effects looked terrible and typical boring CGI garbage. It was so stiff and vapid.

[–] slackware-38833 9 years ago

Meat is murder

Meat is tasty too.

[–] residentevil6901 9 years ago

I was thinking the same thing lol

[–] utahman1971 9 years ago

How do you put Ghostbusters and The Cabin In The Woods together? WTF? They are not even close to being the same. Some people just can't handle redirection in remakes. That is what they do in remakes. A different take on the story. I like seeing things in a different way. Yes, I said it. I like the remakes of all the remakes of older or original movies and I also have an open mind, like some people don't.

Oh and Sam Rockwell was terrible. He reminded me of Snow Angels and I hate him in that movie too. All I could think of was Snow Angels in Poltergeist. I think that was the only thing that bothered me in this movie. He was a bad father in Snow Angels and wasn't too much different in this movie.

I am a gore watching freak!!!

If it don't have it, it isn't worth the watch.

[–] Dejay 9 years ago

Haha well lol. Not sure what to reference otherwise. The second half is more like a comedy adventure than a horror movie. They bring in the cavalry and the big guns and the ghostbuster and explore the underworld. So Cabin for the humor and Ghostbusters for... ghostbusting.

[–] robertrutherford-77544 9 years ago

Just watched Poltergeist on DVD, the longer version. It was really a very cool movie, surprised that it didn't chart better. I have to agree with your o!!

[–] chamohlamb 9 years ago

It's not anywhere near as different from the original as you claim.

[–] oskaymj1 9 years ago

This film was TOTAL CRAP!

[–] budsgrave 9 years ago

Your post is all over the map.
Now, I'm a huge fan of the '82 Poltergeist but How exactly in your estimation did the remake 'screw up' the original version...or affect it in any way whatsoever?
You do realize The original Poltergeist didn't cease to exist once the crummy 2015 version was released?

[–] cavnative 9 years ago

Hollywood needs to re-examine the words creative and original. To me remaking a movie is non creative laziness.
The first Poltergeist movie, which I have countless times because its that GOOD.
I'm not going to sit here and pander to a re-imagined movie because some are greedy when it comes to remaking some movies and enjoy the cash flow for their thin efforts.
And to continue this note.. The Godfather is going to get the "remake" treatment as well with Johnny Depp playing the part of Don Vito Corleone.
It would seem that man in general has an addiction to money, and maybe remaking some movies is in a way a psychological circumstance behind the reason for remaking some movies?
I can't thing of a better way to handicap an entertainment genre, then with remaking already made movies.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] residentevil6901 9 years ago

I love the original and I liked this one, it's definitely not as good but very cool in it's own right. They've been remaking movies ever since they started making movies, they will continue to do so. I like seeing the new imagining they do on some of these. I prefer a few remakes over their original counter parts many times. Not in this case but still enjoyed it very much.