Rival11

I know the new fog remake has been mentioned in the ton of 'remake' threads that are out there but I wanted to start this one off because I actually think it looks pretty damn good and because I'm a fan of the first.

What I'm really interested in seeing is a change at but if the remake does follow the original story, hopefully they will pull it off in a better fashion.

Also, I wanted to start this thread because I know a lot of you out there get the advanced screeing ticket so please post a review as soon as possible after you see it!!

bhk

maingon

i wanna check it out, Maggie Grace

JumpCutz

I think bhk got it right.

I can see the filmmakers 'amping up' the action, as per the current trend and maximizing the shock scares.

I actually liked the languid pace of Carpenter's original.

angryyoungman

I enjoyed the original, but it wasn't by any means great, and I think it could use the upgrade. I saw the trailer before Transporter 2 and it contained a few shots of scenes that were similar to the original but some other imaginative ways for the titular fog to creep around. It looked interesting, although I can't say I'm dying to see it.

Zodiac_Speaking

Um, isn't this a month+ away from us from seeing it? A tad early for a review post, but I'm not dying to see it. I might support it only b/c Debra Hill despartely tried to get this going and now has passed. Carpenter really supports it from what I've heard. Wonder if they'll keep his score. His film was really underappreciated in his canon, let alone in the 80s horror. Hopefully, people will seek his out after this, but stop remaking JC.

nightmaster

I'm hoping for it to be a good movie but I don't expect it to be.

GoldenJCJ

I'm hoping for a good movie, the story has great potential to be scary, but with the scary movie trends as of late, I'm sure it'll be a PG-13 suckfest.

Rival11

Just thought I'd bump this

riley_dude

Tom Welling!

No advance previews. Not good.

mdc3000

I liked it for what it was. Probably almost as good as the original. The Fog effects were great, the ghosts were cool, but I really didn't like the "new" addition of the way the whole thing gets resolved

And I don't know if I saw a bad print, but was this movie FILLED with lots of hazy light reflecting on the film, creating in itself, a Fog of sorts through many of the scenes...this got EXTREMELY distracting (it was even on the side during the credits, so I assume it was intentional...). I realize it was probably an artistic decision, but as a previous film student, who had cinematographers go to great length moving around matte boxes,lights etc. to AVOID this exact effect, to see a movie FILLED with it, during scenes where it didn't add to the "drama" playing out on screen, it got to me. Had they not done this, I would have gotten more into the story of the film, but this technique was awful and really took me out of the picture... Wainwright and the cinematographers made the WRONG call on that one...

Other than that, for a PG-13 horror flick, it was passable and certainly better than The Grudge, Boogeyman etc. Thoughts?

MATT

scott shelton

Bad, bad, bad.

Not that Carpenter's film was all that good, but this blows in comparision.

Who told Maggie Grace and Tom Welling they could act? And why must I pay for that error in judgement?

Zwerchfell

That was really bad! Avoid the Fog or you will fall asleep.

Rockmjd23

11% on rotten tomatoes, up from 0%!!

Cinemaddiction

"The Fog" (2005)

In the updated version of "The Fog", Antonio Bay is victimized by a mysterious, almost supernatural fogbank that summons the ghosts of a ship that sank 100 years ago. Looking to avenge their deaths, that are traced back to the settling families doublecrossing, the fallen come back to the town.

Revisions in the structure make the 2005 edition of Carpenter's story more solid. There's a sufficient backstory, some historical aspects explaining the feud, as well as some complimentary imagery. While Wainwright's effort seemed to have had a high school friendly twist, it never escalated to the absurdity of other teen horrors, more so staying true to the original. The whole picture actually had a lot of potential, and given the thin premise and original workings it had to operate with, it wasn't so much a disappointment as it was a missed opportunity for a better overall film.

"The Fog" displayed some surprisingly solid acting on the parts of Tom Welling, Maggie Grace, and the always fun Selma Blair. As a collective, the performances never came off as contrived or forced, but rather mellow, per the original. What it eventually came down to, was the films lack of a real punch. 105 minutes was too ambitious a time frame in which to stretch the invasion of a big, evil meteorlogical improbability. While I appreciated it being more thorough in the storytelling, it was too sporatic, and would have served better as an opening, instead of installments, sacrificing the pacing.

IMO, it's a renter, but I saw it for free. Makes for a decent date movie.

scott shelton

Actually, the film is 95 minutes. I know because I was constantly checking my watch.

mookyman

This movie goes wrong in every possible way. It's crass, stupid, poorly acted, and hamhandedly directed. It's so "Hollywoodized," so completely designed to pander to fourteen-year-olds, that it almost seems like an intentional joke. A boat of grizzled fishermen becomes "Girls Gone Wild" at sea. Selma Blair's "alternative" station recalls David Cross' joke about "KANSAS CITY'S HOME OF THE ROCK! THE BEST ALTERNATIVE MUSIC - STAIND, LINKIN PARK, P.O.D!" And apparently, we've returned to the production code era when people didn't bleed when stabbed. I realize the original wasn't The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, but I've always been fond of it, and anybody that says this film even comes close basically loses all credibility in my mind. What an utterly soulless, depressing piece of goat shit. What an abortion.

madara

Agh! it sounds like another typical crappy below average horror flick. This makes, what 26 in row? The last good "scary" movie I saw was signs.

clappj

You're so right.

Signs was truly scary!

Scary bad!!!

matome

We're in the PG-13 era. We can't scare the kiddies with blood.

mookyman

That's obvious, but people can still bleed in a PG-13.

Scott Weinberg

While I can plainly acknowledge its flaws, I'm a big fan of the original The Fog.

But as I always do with these remakes, I went in with some hopeful enthusiasm ... and it lasted about 8 minutes. This flick is just horrible. It makes the House of Wax and The Amityville Horror remakes look a whole lot better -- and that's not an easy thing to do.

And as much as I enjoy both Lost and Smallville, Grace & Welling are wholly inept actors. Selma Blair looked like she couldn't wait to collect her check and hit the road.

Terrell

She isn't worth a damn either as far as I'm concerned!!!

AllHallowsEve

I actually wouldn't mind these PG-13 horror films if they were any good or at least fun.

The problem for me is that they suck. Not only do they suck, but they just arent any fun either.

A movie can stink, but still be a fun theater experience. These movies don't even accomplish that. It's pure boredom checking the watch type of stuff.

Thank god I had a free movie ticket. I would have walked out and demanded my money back. I do mean that literally. I still should have been offered free passes to view another film of choice after having to sit through this.

AGuyNamedMike

I saw it yesterday. Very poor outing. WTF is up with the bad acting? WTF is ups with the poor script and huge plot holes? WTF is up with Maggie Grace's chin?