Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
commerciumrapidus
Reviews
The Fog (2005)
Why do they always come back?
"Why did it come back? For revenge? Or justice? Or maybe to claim something lost long, long ago? Maybe we'll never know. But one thing's for sure. Something did come back ... Sooner or later, everything does"
Why did "The Fog" come back?
Because it could be done better than the original horror classic? Not even close.
This film had a few good moments, saving it from the dreaded one star rating, but it is greatly inferior to the original masterpiece by John Carpenter and Debra Hill, which I will likely watch many times in the future. I will not watch this film again.
The good:
Occasional nice cinematography.
Images of story elements not in the original were well done, but I would take John Houseman telling the campfire ghost story to the children on the beach at the beginning of the original over this addition every time.
The bad:
The acting was amateurish and the characters were shallow and ridiculous. I had no sympathy for them.
Showing copious amounts of too young female skin and a sex scene that is gratuitous during the first half of the movie is of no value and is always a sign of a bad film in need of CPR. Sure, Adrienne Barbeau provided some eye candy in the original, but she had the aspect of a mature woman.
Special effects over substance. No thanks.
It is not scary; a bad sign for a film that is supposed to be scary.
The ending which showed some promise, was reduced to complete absurdity.
Why do they always come back?
I should know better than to view the remake of a classic movie, but because of the rare exception, "Nosferatu" comes to mind, it is worth giving it a chance. (I now pledge to never watch the remake of "The Hills Have Eyes")
The original has some great acting, with the mother-daughter duo of Janet Leigh ("Psycho"!) and Jamie Lee Curtis (scream queen of"Halloween" fame), the aforementioned Ms. Barbeau and John Houseman, and Hal Holbrook, among others. The cinematography is beautiful. The score by John Carpenter is one of the best. It is great work of film art. It is tense and scary, which is what we horror fans want.
Check out the original, it is a must see film, and skip this poor imitation, which is not even a good film on its own merits.
Araf (2006)
Gothic Horror is not dead, it is unborn; a film art masterpiece
"They shall have a bed of hell-fire ... thus do we reward the unjust"
This is one of the finest horror films I have seen in a long time. It is terrifying and heartbreaking.
The musical score and cinematography are brilliant. The use of color, and shadow are masterful. The acting is excellent.
The tension is so great that the quite tame scary parts are nearly unbearable.
Some of the imagery is horrific.
I know that I am experiencing a great horror film when I need to take a rest period at some point and then return to it. I did that with "The Exorcist" and "Suspiria" and I had to do that with this film.
Unfortunately, like so many horror films, the ending seems like an afterthought. Very disappointing. I wish the film makers put as much thought and creativity into the ending as they had the rest of the film.
This film will get neither the recognition, nor the distribution it deserves given the theme and the politics of abortion in the mainstream film industry. Too bad. Thank you to Pathfinder Pictures for making this film available on DVD.
This is a "must see - not to be missed" film for the fan of Gothic Horror.