The Haunting (1999) User Reviews

Subtle chills....what's that???

[DocHobbs · 4/10 · 21 July 1999]

Well, my goodness, am I disappointed. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and company will not ruin a film, who's original was a fantastic and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, subtlety, where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is wonderfully photographed; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script puts it's fine actors to the test..asking them to deliver the kind of stilted dialogue that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual effects come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric mess...but things had gone terribly wrong long before that.

Everything in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this old haunted house monstrosity...only groans. Check out the original instead.

A rather good haunted house movie...

[paul_haakonsen · 6/10 · 5 September 2019]

I have seen the 1999 movie "The Haunting" a couple of times now over the years since it was initially released. Well, this remake, I mean, not the original movie.

Personally, then I do enjoy it, as it is a rather good supernatural haunting genre movie. Sure, there are flaws to it, but in overall, then this movie makes for good entertainment and I will say that director Jan de Bont was good at setting up the scenes and building up suspense and thrills.

First of all, the movie boasts a pretty impressive cast list, which includes the likes of Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Owen Wilson, Lily Taylor, Bruce Dern and Virginia Madsen. So there is an abundance of good acting performers in the movie in various roles.

And the movie also have some pretty nice special effects, which were definitely super spectacular in 1999 as the movie was released. But I will say that the special effects actually still hold their own even in 2019, passing as something you could just as easily see in movies made today.

And looking at the incredible details they put into the house, that is enough to boggle your mind. Actually the movie is worth sitting down to watch a second time, just to pay attention to the level of incredible detail they put into Hill House. It is spectacular, and there is just so much to see. I keep finding more details every time I sit down to watch it. So thumbs up, way, way, way up for the commitment put into the sets and props.

The storyline told in "The Haunting" is pretty straight forward, actually to the point where it becomes generic in terms of a haunted house story. But hey, we know what we are in for when we sit down to watch a movie such as this. Regardless, I was - and still am - more than entertained by this movie when I have sat down to watch it over the years. So the movie does have enough contents to it to sustain more than a single viewing.

While this is a supernatural haunted house movie in the horror genre, then the movie wasn't really scary to a seasoned horror veteran such as myself. But luckily it is the storyline and the suspense and building up the scenes that keeps the movie fresh and interesting.

If you enjoy haunting movies, then you definitely should take the time to sit down and watch the 1999 "The Haunting" if you haven't already seen it.

A lackluster supernatural thriller.

[jiangliqings · 18 November 2000]

* and 1/2 stars out of ****

The Haunting is actually a relatively decent film for the first 45 or so minutes. The setup is promising, the production design of the mansion is a sight to behold, and the cast seems to be enjoying themselves. It's unfortunate, however, because after that the film begins to fall apart, leading all the way to the ridiculously bad finale.

Dr. David Marrow (Liam Neeson) is conducting a test on fear, using the bait-and-switch method. By doing so, he's pretending to do a study on insomnia at the Crain estate, a manor 9 miles from the closest town. The "test subjects" that arrive include Eleanor (Lili Taylor), a hard-working woman who has had little success in life, Theo (Catherine Zeta-Jones), an adventuress and proclaimed bi-sexual, and Luke (Owen Wilson), an all-around jokester.

On the first night in the mansion, Eleanor and Theo hear thundering sounds in the walls, but pass it off as a problem in the plumbing. But events get even more bizarre, as Eleanor sees some sort of a figure inside the fireplace, that just as soon disappears. Slowly, Eleanor begins to believe that there are ghosts in the house, ghosts of dead children and the owner of the mansion himself, the evil Hugh Crain. She also makes a discover about her connection with the mansion that could help free the children's spirits.

The Haunting never features one scary moment. Rather than going for subtle chills or all-out shocks like in House on Haunted Hill, Jan De Bont prefers to rely everything on the special effects, which really are rather unconvincing, particularly the statues that come to life and the CGI ghosts.

It even manages to get worse. Now, to be fair, the film was getting dull by the 90-minute mark so I was initially entertained by the effects-filled finale. But everything gets positively ridiculous in the last ten minutes, as we find out evil ghosts like to play hide-and-seek and smash things up real good.

The blame should fall on director Jan De Bont and writer David Self. De Bont seems to care more about what special effect to use next to "wow" the audience rather than actually trying anything innovative. Self really can't seem to write a good story or truly interesting characters. The dialogue is perhaps the worse of his writing skills.

The only thing that keeps this film from a lower rating is the cast, and they do their best to keep the film respectable. Liam Neeson probably delivers the best performance, being neither as dull or unemotional as critics thought. Catherine Zeta-Jones shows a lot of life as Theo, as does Owen Wilson. It's a pity that Lili Taylor's performance, which was decent at first, turned to borderline camp by the finale.

With nary a true scare in sight, The Haunting should best be seen by those who are scared easily or special effects fans. For everybody else, this is probably a house not to spend the night at.

Pretty Darn Bad

[movieman-166 · 1/10 · 19 November 2002]

For movie fans who have never heard of the book (Shirley Jackson's "The Haunting of Hill House") and have never seen the 1963 Robert Wise production with Julie Harris, this remake will seem pretty darn bad.

For those of us who have, it is just plain awful.

Bad acting (what was Neeson thinking?), goofy computer enhancements, and a further move away from Jackson's story doom this remake.

Do yourself a favor and rent the original movie. It still effectively scares without hokey special effects. The acting is professional and believable.

For readers of the book, the from 1963 follows the it much closer.

Hauntingly Bad

[walken_on_sunshine · 1/10 · 20 January 2007]

The Haunting is yet another bad horror remake with phony overdone special effects and a big cast of on screen favorites and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever except maybe for the cinematography.Yes remakes aren't all bad but remakes directed by Jion Da Bont definitely are.I suppose that the A-List actors (Liam Neeson,Catherine Zeta Jones,Owen Wilson)are there to distract us from the boring plot,ridiculous special effects, and terrible attempts at scaring it's audience however this is a movie not a tabloid magazine we don't care whose in it we care about the characters and story two things this film missed.The storyline is like taking the classic novel The Haunting Of Hill House and ripping out four chapters and then using whatever's left for the film it is so boring and a lot of it is unexplained.The characters are pretty thin and while the acting is good you don't really care about any of the characters at all.Lily Taylor gives a horrendous performance and sounds like she's 8 years old when delivering her lines not to mention what a horrible screamer she is.Lily Taylor isn't made for the horror genre at all.The ghosts are stupid and cheesy, they look like a bunch of Casper The Friendly Ghost's and the ghost of Hugh Cain looks like a fat guy dressed as the grim reaper for Halloween with a smoke machine.There is this creature on the roof of one of the rooms that is a giant purple mouth and it's not even funny unintentionally just plain sad.The house is pretty and well designed that is probably the only positive thing about this movie it looks nice but that doesn't save it from it's brutal everything else.I can honestly say i felt like i was wasting my time watching The Haunting on TV for no price so I would've been even more pi$$ed if I had paid to see it but luckily it was on Scream Channel.Overall The Haunting is a boring remake that tries to overwhelm you with bad special effects, a poor attempt at horror.

I Want That House

[Tweetienator · 7/10 · 3 November 2019]

I like this one - of course the real star of The Haunting is the house and the interior - awesome, marvelous, top of the pop, whatever. The story itself of course is a well known one but the cast (Neeson, Zeta-Jones, Wilson, Lili Taylor ) works just solid to good with the story provided. All in all a nice haunted house movie that really lacks only here and there some (serious) gore and maybe one or two unique ideas to make it a more mature horror movie. My rate 6 + 1 bonus for the outstanding settings.

Maybe some billionaire with some spare money reads this --> email me: we will build and plan that mansio together and I will do the housekeeping ;)

Better than it's score would suggest although not without faults

[john_oneill41 · 7/10 · 1 February 2010]

This remake of the sixties classic of the same name has unfortunately been somewhat slated by critics, although I feel it's better than most people seem to think it is.

The location work is stunning and the set design has clearly had a lot of work put into it.

Liam Neeson, Owen Wilson and Catherine Zeta Jones all perform their parts quite well, but Lili Taylor is not as good as she should be. On paper she should be perfect for the role of Nell and for much of the film she provokes the necessary sympathy. She seems unable, however, to scream properly, instead letting what sounds like an animal cry. Also, she seems to say "Oh No" in exactly the same tone of voice every time she sees something frightening, although to be fair this is as much the fault of the script as it is hers.

Towards the end the atmosphere is slightly diluted by such things as having the beds and statues spring to life which makes these scenes much less frightening than they could be.

In spite of all this, this movie has a certain something that regardless of it's faults, makes me want to watch it again and again, and ultimately you can't ask much more from a film than that.

More Like Hammer Films

[mrskywalker · 10/10 · 1 June 2001]

I know it is fashionable now to hate this movie. I have seen hundreds of spook films including he original 1963 Haunting as well as most of the Hammer films. This film is not restrained and does not hold back at all which is probably why so many modern viewers seemed not to like it. Yet many viewers can accept out of control films like Scream because knife killers are more easy to believe for most people than demons or ghosts. Actually this film had many great scenes and the acting and special effects were great. I have seen it 15 times now and it gets better every time. The director of this film has made a number of interesting and stylish films and was not trying for the type of realism of the 6th sense. The Haunting lets go and is certainly not boring. Perhaps this film might appeal more to John Carpenter fans but more of an traditional plot structure. The old Haunting was also a fine film from 1963. It was even more scary. See both and also The Innocents and The Legend of Hell House with Pamela Franklin.

Creepy, but could've been creepier.

[bat-5 · 7/10 · 25 July 1999]

The Haunting is a film that boasts a really creepy house, good effects work and sound work, a cast that seems to believe that everything around them is real and that house. There are scenes that make you jump, and the sinister aspects of what went on at Hill House in the past, I found interesting. There are genuinely creepy moments in the film and I liked the way the ghosts manifested themselves in sheets, curtains and the house itself. Jerry Goldsmith's score gave it the right atmosphere and the sound design had voices popping up around you. What I wish could've happened is for something a little more intense. Jan De Bont had a PG-13 rating to contend with and I think that he held back a little too much. Poltergeist scared me silly when I saw it many years ago, and it still holds up. The Haunting could've used a few more scenes of pure terror. The ending was for me, a little anticlimactic. Overall, I enjoyed it. The acting is good and there are moments that make you jump. I just wish it scared me more.

Suspenseful and frightening terror movie about a haunted mansion

[ma-cortes · 5/10 · 24 October 2011]

It's a remake to long deemed one of the masterly crafted stories of horror ever brought to the screen ¨Haunting¨(1963) by Robert Wise , a gripping film which still packs a punch . Hill House is a hundred-year-old haunted mansion , it is the setting for chosen group . The haunted house has an evil history with tragic accidents, suicide, and human misjudgement. It seems which the scary mansion has been the place of several killing deaths . A psychologist scientist (Liam Neeson) is a Pyschic researcher who assembles a group with histories linked to the paranormal. As three people are lured to an eerie mansion deceived for fake pretenses realized by a psychological researcher . Nell (Lili Taylor) was the subject of unexplained poltergeist activities as a child. She also is riddled with pain over her mother's death. Theo (Catherine Zeta Jones) is a clairvoyant who befriends Nell at Hill House. Owen Wilson plays a cynical and Bon Vivant sent to make sure that the property is not affected by the researchers. Together the group explore Hill House and their own insecurities and finally face off the evil that inhabits with hair-raising results .

Mindless and average film is packed with thrills, intrigue, suspense, horror and lots of interminable screams with no sense. However , this is an inferior version that relies heavily on the impressive special effects courtesy of ILM - Industrial Light Magic- , George Lucas owner . High budget makes for big scary scream-feast and frights . Splendid Lili Taylor as a fragile , lovely youth who results to have unexpected ties to the creepy ghost , she's the only redeeming feature of this uneven movie. Supposedly based on Shirley Jackson's creepy tale titled ¨The haunting of Hill House¨, it has little in common with the novel . Stirring and exciting musical score fitting to terror by the veteran maestro Jerry Goldsmith . Very good and colorful cinematography by Karl Walter Lindellaub . Director Jan De Bont created a taut drama where the real question is who is haunted and who may be unstable.The picture is middling realized in his third-time as director by Jan De Bont, a successful cameraman (Basic Instict, Die Hard) and Paul Verhoveen's ordinary photographer and occasionally director (Speed , Twister). The film will appeal to Liam Neeson and Catherine Zeta Jones fans. This is a chilling adaptation from Shirley Jackson's novel based on an assortment of ghouls and ghosts and gets a mediocre rating . It turns out to be a chiller with all the FX budget can be created , being lavishly produced ,but also contains several scenes in little sense and no logic.

Surprisingly good!

[Gilles-5 · 20 May 2000]

I didn't have too much of a hope I would like this new Jan De Bont film, but after giving it a go today, I was impressed. De Bont is a terrific creator of suspense and camera setups. All his hard work as a cinematographer paid off in movies such as these. He really knows how to build up an atmosphere accompanied by subtle visual effects and sound design. The way that big house groans and 'breathes' just makes my heart beat faster. Equally great is Jerry Goldsmith's score. In some scenes when combined with the atmospheric sound effects it made my neckhair stand up. I was genuinely terrified. A special mention must go to the art direction and set decoration. The house has such wonderful and at the same time disturbing architecture, the thought of having to spend a night there gives me the chills. About the acting, I thought it was nothing special. The Haunting is a solely audiovisual experience, where acting is only of secondary importance. In short, I enjoyed this movie and didn't think the ending was bad. I see about 200-300 movies each year, and I see a lot of bad ones, but this is not one of them. Go see it and decide for yourself.

Odious and Awful

[BoYutz · 1/10 · 22 September 2000]

What an inane effort, one of the worst movies ever made. Horrible acting. Dumb story with Lili Taylor as some kind of psychic sleuth. The interior of Hill House looks like some carnival funhouse. An insult to the original Robert Wise masterpiece and to Shirley Jackson's fine novel.

"It should be burned to the ground, and the ground sown with salt"

[Prof_Lostiswitz · 1/10 · 21 March 2002]

This movie is the most accurate measurement of how low the art of cinematography has fallen. $80 million it cost, and it was finished just in time to qualify as "turkey of the century". The reason it is so glaringly awful is that it has to bear comparison with the 1963 original...a real classic. The main effect of this [1999] movie will be to provoke more people to become acquainted with The Haunting[1963], and to discover its austere beauty. And that of many other forgotten old films.

Spooky, but not especially scary

[Xophianic · 7/10 · 6 February 2000]

Being a fan of pretty much all four of the main actors in this movie (some more than others) I was looking forward to seeing THE HAUNTING. After seeing the very cool-looking graphics that were on the commercials, I was even more excited. Unfortunately, I found that I had already seen most of the best-looking graphics on the commercials. I didn't find the movie too scary, but it was spooky at some parts.

Dr. David Marrow (Liam Neeson) wants to perform experiments using human guinea pigs to learn about human fear. He takes three subjects, Theo (Catherine Zeta-Jones), Luke Sannerson (Owen Wilson), and Nelle Vance (Lili Taylor), who believe that the tests are about insomnia, to a giant mansion. The mansion has a scary history and some very creepy rooms, decorations and gargoyles. The subjects come to learn that the mansion truly is haunted, though Dr. Marrow thinks it is just part of his experiment. Soon, the four have to struggle to survive the night and get out of the mansion alive.

The story line is fairly interesting, but this movie is overlong and tends to get boring at parts. The computer effects are fantastic, but they aren't shown enough until the end and most of those effects you probably saw on previews and commercials.

Catherine Zeta-Jones stole the show, playing an extremely sexy bisexual. Liam Neeson did a fair job, but he does tend to go into spurts of over-acting. Owen Wilson does well as the comic relief and Lili Taylor did an OK job as the first woman to notice the mystery of the mansion. All characters are very different and it is fascinating to see how they all react to the haunted mansion.

This movie is definitely worth a rent. You might be bored at some parts, but the action is good and the ending is fair. Go enjoy.

Not a horror, but still interesting!

[EggOrChicken · 8/10 · 17 September 2018]

If you wanted a horror story, they tricked you. Happy Halloween! But, it still has a good story line and it's visually interesting. Compare it to Thir13en Ghosts (2001).

Hmm.

[mm1000 · 7/10 · 8 July 2006]

Well, I watched this movie for over 2 times. I thought it was all right, though I haven't read the book or watched the older version of this.

I read other people's comments, and most of them rated for this movie for only two or even one star. I think this movie was well performed, and it really gave me chills every second. The children's statue and the special effects were pretty unique. We can also observe how every character shown their different personalities, and they try to fight against the evil spirit or get defeated by it.

Maybe I should read the book and compare it carefully once again?

I rate this movie 7 out of 10.

A REAL Stinker!!

[JThomas-2 · 11 May 2000]

This movie is a remake of a truly horrifying and nightmare inducing 1963 film of the same name. Why Hollywood thinks that digital effects and campy acting is better than the imagination is beyond me. This film is so full of digital effects (none of which look real) and overacting that it cannot compare to the original film which starred Julie Harris and Claire Bloom. This film is just plain stupid. The original (in black and white) is still the scariest film I've ever seen (and I've seen them all). The original makes you use your imagination to fear the unseen - this remake doesn't allow you to do that and that is its biggest mistake.

too obvious

[mauricekleykens · 1/10 · 4 August 2006]

The original movie ( dated 19??)did not show any "monster" , it just SUGGESTED scary "things" , .

This version however shows every aspect of a "sick minded ghost" , including unnecessary special effects .

The "mystery " ,as presented in the original movie , was the most scary part : one simply did not know what was causing the weird things that happened. By showing the face of the "old man" , this Mister has completely disappeared. Even worse : the special effects ( crying wooden children faces) is ridiculous. This is a stupid remake , too obviously spectacular to even be close as scary as the original

Frighteningly bad

[Chrissie · 3/10 · 23 November 2004]

The scariest thing about "The Haunting" is that somebody spent that much money on such a bad movie.

The sets, costumes, and special effects were worthy of the best Spielberg or Lucas could offer, but they're wasted on a Mystery Science Theater 3000 script. Who wrote the screenplay, R.L. Stein?

The characters are utterly alien. They rush into situations where they should be terrified. They brush off serious questions, leave Nell alone when they think she's in danger, fail to even check on her claim that she found skulls under the fireplace (okay, the headshrinker makes a dulsatory attempt, but doesn't follow through), send the biggest and heaviest member of the group up a fragile set of stairs instead of having the slender woman come back down them, et cetera ad nauseum.

If the dialogue got any cornier, the FDA would classify it as a vegetable and add it to the Food Pyramid.

Visually, it's beautiful. If you want to feast your eyes, watch it without the sound, maybe listening to some classical music. Then it's salvageable. Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

Great special effects...but not at all scary

[Meredith-7 · 5/10 · 30 April 2000]

I hadn't heard anything particularly good about this film, but I thought I would see it for myself. I was disappointed to a certain extent- because it just was not at all scary. it looked like it might be, and the haunting of Hill House certainly is a very creepy novel- but this film is just special effects wizardry and thats about all. It has a great cast, particularly Taylor, Neeson and Zeta-Jones, but they really do play second fiddle to the special effects. The set design really is magnificent, but the story is fairly average and the characters are unfortunately a little underdeveloped. By the end I was bit bored with the 'creepy house', because it just was not 'creepy' enough. Some of the lines were so laughable it could have been mistaken for a comedy. Visually stunning for a while, but when you run out of things to look at- there is nothing else of interest.

Worth a Watch

[cubsckc · 7/10 · 13 July 2014]

As a horror film, I think its a descent watch compared to many out there. Its a good watch to have one night for sure. Its different from most horror films because it basically deals with spirits and a haunted house. I would say this haunted house really did have a good way to grab the attention of the fans. So as far as directing the house to appear as an identity, I would say it goes as far as hitting farther than Amityville Horror. You could definitely feel the house. I was actually surprised to see the rating of the film. First of all, there isn't anything in this film that makes it BAD. To rate it a one, shows how terrible a lot of IMDb users are, who simply don't like something and put ones. I hardly ever give out a ten or a one because its an obvious ridiculousness.

Okay, but what prevents this movie from being a big hit you ask? I would stress the acting as well as the plot are relatively underdeveloped. I think this is different from saying there is not plot or they didn't play out the plot very well. They invented a plot... and I'm just not sure many audiences can relate to it. Its an interesting plot but it doesn't really make you think you could be in a scenario like that. Part of scary movies and there suspense is that imaginative element that makes one play with an alternate universe where you could be in it. Instead, the scenario for these characters are not ones that anyone of us would like or even imagine ourselves in. As such, the protagonist and the actors aren't able to give that WOW factor. Mind you, it does have a creepy sense to it, but just doesn't hit it out of the park. I also question the use of Hansel from Derek Zoolander in this film. I actually think he made the movie less scary.

All in all, if you haven't seen this yet, I say go for a watch. It will creep you out, and could give you the chills.

Weird but quite wonderful, actually.

[paulclaassen · 4/10 · 1 July 2018]

Firstly, the house is incredible! The setting in the huge old house in itself is creepy, let alone all the wooden carvings of kids! The house's back story was actually more interesting than the plot itself, which I didn't find convincing enough. I did enjoy the eerie atmosphere and subtle, real scares without the help of overbearing music. The visual effects are simply awesome! The film does become weird towards the end, but nevertheless remains interesting and entertaining.

In defence of The Haunting

[Hayden-86055 · 7/10 · 2 January 2021]

The Haunting is an extremely creative and interesting film that could well have been amazing if pulled off correctly.

The film boasts a good cast with: Catherine Zeta-Jones, Lili Taylor, Owen Wilson and Liam Neeson. They all do quite a convincing and good job in their role and help give the scenes some life they overwise might not have had with different actors. Each character is very unique and has good personality traits.

The plot is quite average but where the film really stands out is the fantastic art direction and ridiculously gothic mansion. The mansion is one of the greatest fictional architectural moments I've ever seen in film and is extremely rich with detail and dark. The soundtrack is also a point for praise, it has some really good tracks which are used well to set the scene. The house is really its own character. Furthermore, there are some very interesting story elements regarding the history of the house, such as the owner (the ghostly Hugh Crain) taking children from his textile mills and murdering them, stuffing their bones under the fireplace so as to have a family for all eternity. Spooky

7/10: A good gothic horror, overlook its flaws and you're in for a treat

I enjoyed this film...and bought a copy...

[scifiguy-2 · 7/10 · 26 November 1999]

I'm a BIG fan of the original movie, made in 1963. Nearly passed this over, because of bad reviews. The film-going public has become so jaded, most people wouldn't know a work of art, if it bit 'em ! ! The art direction and set designs in this film are INCREDIBLE ! The atmosphere is so thick, you need an aqua-lung to breathe ! Theres NO blood and guts...NO slasher in a mask.... and that seems to be a lot of people's complaints........................"not as good as "Halloween"... If you liked the original, imagine a version of the story with special effects worthy of Ray Harryhausen. The sets are extremely massive and exotic. Attention to detail is more intricate than the eye can take in. Visually, the film is a treat, and the soundtrack is terrific. Anyone who has seen the original will have to admit that the "spiral staircase" scene is a big improvement over the '63 version. I think the people who claim they weren't scared, are too guarded AND jaded to BE scared. If a good ghost story is your cup of tea, make some popcorn, turn down the lights, and hold on tight.

A truly horrible film

[Jexxon · 13 July 2000]

One would like movies like these to be scary, or at least chilling, but de Bont's Haunting is just plain stupid. The house and settings are great to look at but most of the effort on making the film has gone into over-the-top computer generated effects and zombie looking actors, while the script makes no sense at all. How much fun is it to watch Lili Taylor walking around talking to herself in order to help the audience understand what is happening on screen? Unintentionally funny moments include Mr Crain's incredibly bad make up and Owen Wilson not being able to climb over a closed gate. In short, stay away from Hill House.