Chris Stuckmann: Poltergeist

Chris Stuckmann reviews Poltergeist

About ChrisStuckmann

Quick, funny reviews of movies and games, new and old.

22 comments

  1. Heh, I could never be a critic. I mean if I had 5-10 minutes in front of a camera to talk about what I thought about Lazarus Effect (or Project, the movie itself seemed unclear as to what the title was), I’m afraid I wouldn’t have anything kind to say about that movie. Even Olivia Wilde in all her hotness cannot save the movie when the camera catches her breathing after a scene where she got electrocuted to death. I can’t remember the last time I left the theater wanting to fight someone that badly. On that note Chris, do you plan on taking a swing at that movie? I really want someone on this site to give it the ol’ Balboa-meat-locker treatment.

  2. I don’t really like scary movies so I’ll skip both.

  3. Bloodsehd113094

    I knew from the moment I saw the clown doll that this wouldn’t be good. The reason the first movie’s clown was so scary was because it wasn’t a prop. This was a doll kids owned and likely had it sitting on a chair in the corner of their room like in the movie. When you just make it some random scary doll from any horror movie, you lose the effect the original had of being realistic. It’s the same with the CG. The commercials really liked the scene where the kid was grabbed by the leg next to the stairs and it looked really fake and lazy. I don’t see horror movies to begin with, but Poltergeist is a classic that didn’t need a remake. Although you could say that about most horror movie reboots.

  4. I dont know about other people but CGI to me is cartoon.
    If they hand-draw the effect is the same because to me is just cartoon.
    Maybe because I grew with CGI cartoons and to me cgi is just cartoons.

    • “CG is just cartoon.” No shit Sherlock.

      By that logic I could say something stupid like
      “To me, practical effect is just puppet. If they use Muppet to replace Evil Dead monster, is the same because they just puppet. Maybe because I grew watching Muppets and to me practical effect is just puppet.

  5. Nerdfighter007

    “Most child actors are horrid.” That right there is part of why to me Daredevil Netflix series is so awesome. The kid they got to play Elementary school age Matt doesn’t just have a beleivable relationship with his dad, he manages to play a believable blind person until he meets Stick. I’m guessing the actor is a year or two older than the 8/9 Matt Murdock character, but still, I don’t know of many sited actors who’ve managed to believably play an adult blind character, let alone a sited child actor playing a blind character, so whoever this kid is, I hope we see more of him, because that takes some serious skill. That said, hopefully he doesn’t get type-cast playing blind roles.

    As for Poltergeist, I’m pretty picky about the horror movies I like. I haven’t seen many lately because most of them look like garbage and I actively detest torture porn. That said, I might just hunt down the original Poltergeist instead of seeing this thing. Studios really need to stop making garbage remakes of classics.

  6. Nerdfighter007

    Bloodsehd: Excellent point. Moviemakers seem to have forgotten that the reason stuff like that is scary is because its something someone watching probably has in their home. Thats partly why the Chucky movies were so damn scary in the eighties: It might not have been a real doll, but it looked like one, not something that had time traveled from the 1800s or been made by someone intentionally trying to make a creepy prop toy.

  7. Lazy movies like this make me kinda mad, There are some movies out there that really REALLY need a remake (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen) but Hollywood isn’t interested in those. Hollywood is only interested in remaking movies that don’t need a remake, now people are sick of remakes so even if a movie that does need to be remade (Assassins) gets remade people will dislike it just because it’s a remake and ignore any value it has. I admire Stuckman for doing his best to point out the strengths of this film.
    Highlander, Escape From New York and The Crow are all getting remade, WHY??!?!?!?!?

  8. No, no. There are other reasons why a film could be remade.

    For example, Carrie. The 1976 version is, without question, dated. A remake could very well be in order.

    The problem is that the Carrie remake still somehow sucked balls. I don’t know how they could have screwed it up so bad, but they did.

    The Poltergeist remake does the same.

  9. Why not just show the original in cinemas again, if this is such a slave to the original? They got away with re-releasing the original Star Wars, Jurassic Park, Blade Runner, and so on. Just do that with Poltergeist. Are they worried that people will be too scared of eighties fashion or something to watch it?

    • I actually just rewatched it last night. It was hilariously over-the-top. Besides, the original has parents smoking pot; can’t have that.

      • “Besides, the original has parents smokin pot. Can’t have that.”
        What are you, twelve? Sure, I dont endorse using drugs of any kind, but saying that some characters using it once as a detractor of the movie is pretty damns shallow thinking. That’s like me saying that I shouldn’t watch a movie because someone in it holds a gun.

        And don’t give me stupid crap about saying that it can negatively influence people into doing the drug. The movie is intended for people old enough to know that you’re not supposed to just imitate stuff in movies. Besides, I really doubt someone would just watch the movie and say, “Wow! Those parents from that movie did pot! I guess I should do it to.”

        • TooMuchFreeTime

          Dude it’s possible they were serious, but I doubt it. Either way there is no reason for you to get THAT bent out of shape over a comment like that.

  10. I knew it was going to be lame due to the poster-clown channeling Five Nights at Freddy’s waaaaay too much. FNaF did jump-scares right, but a Hollywood movie trying to leech of a indie games success… just seems lazy when it comes to advertising design.

  11. Oh, and apparently the commentors on IMDB hate this guy.

  12. TooMuchFreeTime

    Are you wearing a Starfox shirt because of the news of that old unreleased Starfox sequel finally being finished? …OH hey! It’s a mashup too! Hey Venkman, do a barrel roll!

  13. It was funny waiting before Mad Max started, me and a friend talked about the poster of the clown doll and I said, “Why did they even use this? It’s barely in the original and there’s numerous things they could have pulled.” Apparently the face ripping part isn’t in the new one (because I guess that would have been too interesting, though they’d probably screw it up somehow) or the corpses, or I don’t know, the actual poltergeists! So I said “The general public, like kids, will just assume it’s some scary movie about a clown doll, it’s just like Chucky” which might turn some people off of it being boring now that movie goers I assume expect a bit more nowadays. Not a moment later, a 7 year old walked by with his mother and said “Oh it’s Chucky” proving my point immediately! How he even knows what Chucky is I wasn’t sure, but when such a young kid can say to himself “Hey, I’ve seen that before” That’s a huge problem!

    And then with a budget of $35 million dollars and seeing the trailer and it looks like a Waynes Brother’s Scary Movie rip off, where the hell does all the money go?! And the fact this one is PG-13, but looks infinitely tamer than the PG 1982, genuinely creepy original… why does Hollywood have to be so ass backwards?

  14. Moviemantweeter1999

    Wow another horror mocie that sucks not suprised at all by that. But in the advertisements for the movie there seemed to be an awfully lot of jump scares which i hate because thats the most overused cliche in horror movies these days. But a squirrel serioudly. I am totally gonna skip this cgi dumpfest and go see a good movie. Like im gonna go see mad max fury road on monday and i hope its really good cause if its not ill be mad (which lets face it its probably gonna be good so why am i complaining).

  15. I saw the Poltergeist trailer before Avengers: Age of Ultron. At the end of it, the crowd in the cinema screen I was in were laughing.

  16. I feel sorry for people that haven’t seen the original and will think this movie was great. Now there are no movie that can’t be remake but to do it right they have to be several factor. First, is there enough original material by the writer/filmaker to make the remake interesting. A good example of this is the movie The Thing. Which is a remake of a black and white film. First the movie did away with the 50’s dialogue and black and white film making style. Thinking the alien wasn’t a body suit giant instead of was a life form that disquise itself. After that character were change to pull the audience in. If you watch the two film side by side the only basic plot remain the same, but they are both totally different movies which people can enjoy. One done badly is a film like pscycho which was shot for shot the same. WHY do that? Why would someone want to see a film that nearly exact like the original this isn’t a stage play. All we need to do is just rewatch the original. Last and not least if you are going to do a remake YOu have to make it as interesting or better then the original. One of the worse remake in modern times Total recall. It was BLAH. while they did create new element there was no life in that film. At no point were you invested in any character.

  17. ThePuzzlerOfRiddles

    I respectfully have to disagree.

    I’ve seen the original and absolutely love it. I had very low expectations going into the remake, and was very pleasantly surprised.

    First off, I didn’t mind the CGI. It was very obviously CGI, but I think it looked better than a few of the original effects. Some of them in the original were great; the scene where she was dragged into the closet, the toys flying around. Others, such as the giant piñata don’t really hold up. Or the evil bug thing. The original film counted on these being terrifying, and seeing it for the first time, as twenty year old in 2015 killed any scariness in those scenes.

    I also think the ending was improved. Instead of the family hanging around the house, after the house was “clean”, they tried to get out of there as fast as possible, which I assume most sane people would do. Admittedly, I do wish we had had the floating scene, even if it had been earlier the film. But for me, I feel it’s a fair trade off.

    Thirdly, and I know many people disagree with me. I really enjoyed watching the kids. Some of their dialogue was a little wooden, but I enjoyed the expanded role they had. Especially the older sister. I barely remember anything about her from the original, and to see her interact with the younger siblings helped make the family a lot more sympathetic.

    I do agree, that this didn’t really need a remake, but for what it was, I sincerely enjoyed it.

    I would also note, that I don’t think the original is that scary, which is perhaps why I enjoyed this one. It was creepy yes, but scary… not really. The build up was good. The ending, was kinda silly, with the house exploding and giant fake bug ghost things appearing and tombs popping out of the ground and skeletons, just sorta floating there, in the half dug pool. It was what I wanted to see, but instead of scaring me, it made laugh, being somewhat over the top.

    Over all, I’d give this film a B+.

Leave a Reply