MovieChat Forums > Phantoms (1998) Discussion > Was this movie any good???

Was this movie any good???


I've read a few Dean Koontz novels, and I'm a fan of horror films. That being said, I was wondering if you'd recommend this. I really don't want to waste my time if this is a 'crapfest'.

reply

Two things

Firstly, you'll only know if YOU personally would like it by watching it, not by someone else telling you what they thought

Secondly, I'm surprised at the low rating, as this was one of the first horror films I ever saw, and yet is one of the few to actually scare me

reply

Why don't you freaking WATCH THE MOVIE?

DERP???




http://us.imdb.com/name/nm2339870/

reply

Q: Was this movie any good?
A: No.

reply

Watch it at night in the dark.

Very suspenseful for a B grade movie, I was pleasantly surprised.
The ending is ho-hum, but to the movie's credit, the ride there was not too bad.

reply

I thought the first half was pretty good, but after that the film goes downhill pretty fast. (a pity)

Great music though. 10 years later and i still remember this movie.

reply

[deleted]

I read the book, as I am a Koontz fan, then saw the movie. I don't know about you, but both of them scared the crap out of me.






















I live in a glass house, ergo, I throw no stones.

reply

I also read the book and saw the movie after. The movie is pretty good, full of suspense and a creepy atmosphere that builds up over the first 45 minutes. I am surprised at the low IMDB rating as the film deserves a higher score imo.

reply

Like some other posters have said, the film starts off good, with a creepy atmosphere and genuine scares, yet it sinks pretty heavily after that.

So, was this movie any good? Overall, despite the good cast, no, it was bad.

-Goodnight, mother of six!
-Goodnight, father of two!

reply

+1

reply

The movie started out interesting with the sisters roaming through the creepy (but beautiful) town, but then the story got all mucked up in sci-fi nonsense. Literally the moment Affleck appeared on-screen in his hat, the movie went downhill from there. Then there was Liev Schreiber's terrible performance and/or badly-written part. The movie would have worked better as a ghost/horror story with the sisters and some survivors from the town, not a sheriff and a couple of dolts. If it was more similar to The Mist, it might have gotten better reviews.

reply

The book is better than the movie

reply

It passes the time, and there's worse B-grade movies out there, in my opinion. It focuses more on thrills and action than the book does, I think. Both can be enjoyed independently from one another. If the film itself comes up on TV, it may not hurt. Otherwise it probably isn't worth more than a rental or a bargain.

reply

It's actually a pretty creepy and well acted movie. The first 30 or 45 minutes were really good. Joanna Going & Rose Mcgowan were excellent. They should've kept it just the two sisters in the deserted town for a little longer, finding more victims. I thought the intro of Affleck and the cops was ok, but is was too soon.

The movie really lost most of the creepiness once the military arrived. It became another sci-fi, mumbo jumbo laden movie. However, it's still way better than some posters on this board say.

The scene with Affleck and the dog imitation was pretty intense.

reply

started ok, then got very good, then got very slow, ended ok
over all worth a look if you like horror/sci-fi, don't expect a classic tho

reply

no.

i couldn't finish it. Probably great special effects for 1998. But you know what? Ben Affleck was hot in this movie.

some days, it's not worth chewing through the restraints..

reply

I really liked it but I am one of the only ones to think this.

reply

I really liked it too. perfect B-movie with crazy FX

1789

reply

All I know is Affleck is the BOMB in this.

---
in the beginning, it is always dark

reply

Phantoms like a motherf---er!

You, you got what I need. But you say he's just a friend. But you say he's just a friendOHBABY!

reply