About the only reason I did enjoy this movie, was the cast, as they tried their best to flesh out unidimensional characters in a script that sadly, tries a little bit too hard to pay an homage to the original (and to a couple more films), but that also had a few twists now and then. I'm not comparing at all my experience as a 12 years-old kid watching the original. Back then, an uncle of mine (who passed away some years ago, God keeps his soul) was the manager at our town's largest cinema (a nice 70mm film 2000 seater that has been torn down since), and used to let me watch for free (and most of the times, all by myself) every single new film they got, before it opened, from 1980 up to 1987, when I moved to another city. Now, 1982 was for me a GREAT year: Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan, Blade Runner, Tron, The Thing, E.T, Conan: The Barbarian, Creepshow, The Dark Crystal, Firefox... almost every Saturday opening was a fantastic movie, in every genre. For the original Poltergeist, I was alone in the cinema, scared shitless. For this version... let's say I was checking boxes (while eating my popcorn) regarding how they got this or that from the first one, and the cast made me enjoy the experience. Have we seen way too many movies, that now we have become so cynical, expecting so much at every opening?. I don't know. I'm still missing watching in awe brand new movies on a huge screen all by myself as a kid. Having said that, I'm sure that there are some scenes cut from the theatrical release that I hope will get into the Blu-ray. It's a fine move, and it stands by itself when we cease to compare it.

It's here... and it sucks

I still have no idea why they did a remake on Poltergeist and why Hollywood keeps making remakes in the first place. These just no point and it anyone's me that these people think they can top the original but always fail because you can't top the original unless your John Carpenter and you made The Thing then yeah good job you somehow top the original. But I also curious of how this was going to turn, I mean Hollywood must have learned from they mistakes by now by not adding any stupid CG monsters or loud jump scares. After seeing the movie I'm still not impressed.

The only good thing in this movie was Sam Rockwell, Rosemarie DeWitt, and Jared Harris. Those three were the only good actors in the movie and at least tried to give a some what of a good performance, they tried they best and I can give them that. But I still have no idea why they here in the first place, maybe it's money or they got force to do it, I don't know maybe it's just the money and if that's the case these three acted they ass off to get that paycheck.

The movie itself has some creative scares or creepy moments, I like to call it. When I mean some I really do mean some of the scares in the movie, which is kind of surprising that must remakes normally just suck all the way. Gil Kenan directed this movie and he's also the same guy who did Monster House and that movie itself had it's creepy moments and it also involves a possessed house. I think some of the creativity that Gil Kenan had went into this movie.

I've seen many horror remakes that are much much worse then this. At least this one tried a little hard from most remakes, because a lot of horror remakes today are just so freaking lazy and they don't put any effort at all in they movies and it just comes off as crapping on the original.

Now for the problems: There is way way too much CGI in the movie and I do mean Hollywood horror movie cliche bad. There's a scene in this movie where a CGI squirrel jumps out the wardrobe (like a jump scare) and the way it ran around and how it looked just made me put my hands smack down on my face with pure disappointment of what I just saw. And that's not all, these other scenes where it involves CGI with the demon ghost and other object's trying to kill them. People in Hollywood if you see this review (somehow) stop making scary things into CGI crap, it's not scary it just make you look cheap. Go back to old school practical effect's with make-up and hairstyle in horror movies, at least it's actually there and it doesn't look like a crappy looking computer bug.

Every advertisement for this movie has been for the f**king clown. It doesn't really scare me anymore because everywhere I go I see a billboard advertisement and you know what's on there? The clown facing us. I mean everywhere I go I see the damn thing and it's not even creepy anymore, it's just annoying how it's everywhere and how they showing the clown too much. I mean is that the way the film makers behind this movie think that the clown is going to make me run out of my way to see this movie, thank god we got online piracy because I'm paying to this a horror remake and that clown isn't going to fool me, I watched it for free so...HA! Yeah, you can saw it worked as I have seen the movie and reviewing it as I speak, but let's not forget I sawed it online for FREE and didn't pay to see it, that's why it's number 4 on this week box office.

The child actors in the movie are not very good. I know it may seem a bit mean for me saying that the kids in the movie are piss poor actors, but again, let's not forget here that we have seen great performance from child actors in past horror movies so that proves that some children can act in horror movies, but here it seems like the producer's wanted their kids in the movie to make money and get them famous = more money. The little girl in the movie of course plays with the ghost demons and here's the thing in these kind of movies, what's up with these kids not once getting a bit freaked out over this I mean kids will cry or get scared over anything that's not human. The two movies that I think of that did it realistically was in The Babadook and The Conjuring were the kids got pure scared of this thing and not once played with it.

The movie overall doesn't do anything new with it's character's, story or anything really. I bet this remake will be forgotten at the end of the year, unless they do a squeal (which I hope doesn't happening).

It’s not the worst remake of all time, but it’s just ordinary. It’s bland, lifeless, vanilla, and feels like what the Lifetime Channel in America would do to a remake of the Tobe Spielberg classic haunting film. I think the only reason Gil Kenan was hired for this movie was because the movie is based around a monster house and he depicted a monster so well in his last film that the job only seemed like a no brainer. The problem is Kenan forgets to produce likable characters and interesting scares during the process of producing an evil possessed house. - _Zevi Wolmark_

> Would have been a better film if it was an original.

Unnecessary to compare this with the original and I tried, but impossible to avoid it since it's an official remake. Everything, from the house to frame by frame, all the scenes looked the same, except the cast and it's set in the present world with the daily life's modern gadgets. If you had not seen the 80s film, then there's a little chance you might like it. Though it was not a serious horror movie, or a scary movie to consider, still quite enjoyable like a dark comedy in parts. But I recommend the old one.

Really? Sam Rockwell? He did not fit in the role, just okay though. And the kids, did not impress me as like the original movie. The only upgrade in this new version was the technology, CRT monitors to LED kind of stuffs. I expected a major, at least a bit alteration in the story or the screenplay that sets in a different circumstances and the location. That could have been a lot better. Disappoints for those who loved the first version. However, that movie deserved to be remade, and I did not think it would end like this. Hoping for a better sequel, but I'm already feeling that would end in the hands of the second string cast and crew which could be a cheap horror-thrill.

5/10

I had huge reservations about watching this remake, which I felt was completely unnecessary. It wasn't as bad as I had anticipated, and that the bad reviews at the time gave me the impression I should fear or avoid watching it. The special effects were pretty good, and Sam Rockwell, Jared Harris and Jane Adams (how wonderful it was to see her again, after her exceptional work in 'Happiness'!) sold the film for me. I knew what to expect after liking, but not loving, director Gil Kenan's earlier animated 'Monster House', but I was intrigued how his energetic directing would transfer to live-action work.

I think they could have made it more suspenseful and scary, but I'm not really sure that was their intention. I think they were going for a family experience with some thrills, chills and laughs...such as the recent 'Ghostbusters' remake was going for. If that was the case, then in that regard it was quite successful. I'm looking forward to re-watching this eventually with my 13-year-old son, horror-film aficionado, Julian, who like me adored the original.

If I was to make the perfect 'Poltergeist' film, I would have taken the same exact Steven Spielberg script and simply updated the special effects. I think that would have been a more successful approach.