The old "The Omen" movies were fine enough as they were, so I can't really fully comprehend the weird obsession Hollywood have with re-making everything that once spun gold.With that being said, keep in mind that the 2006 version of "The Omen" is actually a good enough movie in and by itself. Just don't put it up next to the old classics.The movie does have a nice story, of course. And this re-make actually worked out quite well because of a rather good cast ensemble and some rather good special effects and CGI.Liev Schreiber and Julia Stiles performed quite nicely in the movie, and did indeed bring a lot of flavor to the movie.The entire movie was a bit predictable, certainly, but still enjoyable and watchable for sure. If you are not already familiar with the franchise that is "The Omen", then this 2006 re-make makes for a wholesome entertaining movie. If you, however, are familiar with the franchise, then this re-make seems redundant and rather unnecessary.

There is something off-putting about it. I know, it's The Omen, there is supposed to be something off-putting about it, but its not in the creepy good way.I think the bad after-taste is that it follows the original far too close and because of that, like most remakes, it's not saying anything new. It sort of leaves the viewer in the position where they don't understand why they are still watching it.True, the first Omen does seem dated...but even then it adds to the retro appeal and, honestly, it still seems fresh. The concepts, the movie, it was all new in the original and you still have that sense when you go back it it.Honestly, dated isn't bad. it takes a special kind of short-bus rider to dislike something just because it looks old.The remake, it's covering the same old ground and, honestly, aside for a couple dream sequences and the scene at the zoo, it hasn't really improved at all.And then you have the cast Liev Schreiber doesn't really fill Gregory Peck's shoes. Julie Stiles is OK...but wooden compared to Lee Remick.Thewlis was good, but Warner made the more believable photographer.In fact, the only real improvement is Postlethwaite but this is the one case where they really cast a better actor in the role. Troughton was OK, but really, you can't compare.And the talking Damien...no, he was creepier when he didn't really speak.So what you are left with is a shallow remake that doesn't say anything new, offers no revelations, no new insight, and doesn't have the same caliber actors in it.I mean, the only people that are going to like it more, are the mouth-breathers that can't stand watching anything dated.

The Omen (2006) is not a movie that is for everyone. Some people will definitely be turned off by it, and not because it's a bad film, but because it is a dark movie, it's not the goriest ever, but the plot and the overall tone of many scenes is very dark and gloomy. Julia Stiles and Liev Schreiber do a good job in their starring rules, I really enjoyed Liev in particularly, he just seemed very focused, dramatic when necessary, and he just seemed to fit in his role. The script is pretty well written and the direction worked also. The visuals are well done, although there is one killing that occurs in the film that I through was too brutal. The other violence and killings aren't over the top graphic, but that particular killing was just over the top in my opinion, and also, the visuals to that kill looked slightly fake/cheap. The nanny that comes to work for them after the horrific suicide of the first nanny is very creepy and just has a very eerie feel to her. That actress really did do a wonderful job at playing that role, her very presence gives you chills. The ending is bone chilling and well constructed, no spoilers here, have to see it for yourself. I will say though, this film is not for the squeamish or the kind that gets easily disturbed/offended by dark material. I mean after all, this is Satan's son we're talking about here. 7/10 for The Omen (2006)

That's the big question for this movie. I'm not going to go through this shot for shot. I don't know how many lines are different. I don't know how many scenes are shot at different angles. None of the changes are significant enough to overshadow how some of the most iconic imagery in movie history are simply copied. It's annoying at best, and sacrilege at worst.Liev Schreiber, Julia Stiles, and David Thewlis are all great actors. And it's incredible that Mia Farrow played Mrs. Baylock. It's a well made movie. The problem is we've seen this movie before. We've seen these images before. We've seen the nanny jump off the roof before. We've seen the priest spiked through the chest before. We've seen Damien on his tricycle before. What's the point of a remake if it means copying?