It was a poor re-make of the original
352066
It was a poor re-make of the original. The stars didn't do anything for me; it was very boring. Watch the original; it's much better.
274423
I think it missed a lot of things from the original the original cartoon version was way better
1510778
I was a big Battlestar Galactica (TOS) fan in the late 70's along with my now wife. I asked my son for this set for my Birthday. I opted for this set because it had the movie. Had I known that it was the same as the pilot I would have opted for the cheaper set. The quality of the remaster was not good. The smudges in the Viper launching was still present. The wires where visible, and the image was not sharp. The sound was much better. If I where going to buy it again I would just get the BD OF The original widescreen with no extras. The 1980 series was really bad. The actors where even more stilted than on TOS. The stories where preachy, and they tried but failed to send a message. The quality of the 1980 series was very bad. It was like watching the film through a haze. TOS Ddid have some great guest stars, not so with the 1980 version.
3515521
This was bad.

I loved the original. This stays pretty much just like the first movie, but adds nothing. Some of the best dialog from the original is re-used here, but is so much less effective Example..."That's not my ..." after the husband burns just has no impact in this one.

Also, the "bad guys" are over the top ugly, they makeup actually takes away from the shock of the violence.

Even the role of the dog in this one is reduced to a "ho-hum" instead of an awe-inspiring view of man's best friend.

Anywayzzz... stick to the original.
4413057
I found this to be a disappointment. It didn't sound as it did on the originals. Go buy original soundtracks instead of this one.
The only reason that I give 2 stars instead of 1 is that they perform it really well but they don't stick to the mood and pace of the originals.
4654776
Came up a little short, they made this one a knock off of the original version, when they should have just moved on beyond that one.
2715309
Another unnecessary remake. The power of the first film is non-existent in this remake. I couldn't connect with the characters whatsoever, and the script was as shallow as a puddle. Skip this one and see the original if you haven't already.
4388292
Terrible product.  It's a poor knockoff of the original.  It is a total waste of time to purchase this product.
3388154
This cut of the film is clearly less than the original. Parts of the most beautiful poetic statements were left out and replaced with mood more mood and more mood. The marketing people have created a product where there should not have been one.
4776974
I simply loved the original psycho-cybernetics, but this version and also the one by bobbe sommer are cheap imitations. Although this version contains most of the material as the original it is laced with useless fluff and story after story by kennedy that makes this a much longer boring read. The original was shorter and to the point, easier to understand, a pleasure to read. I wish they would print a hardcover anniversary edition of the original, it is MUCH better. Why tamper with perfection as they say!
2666064
A remake is a tough thing to consider....

Does one stay faithful to the original -or- try to revamp the film with something new to offer ?

There is another important thing to consider, SOME FILMS DON'T NEED A REMAKE!

The OMEN like PSYCHO is one of those films that can stand on it's own and had no need for a remake (like Led Zepplin's STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN).

There is NOTHING a studio could do to win in this situation, although it appears they did make $$$ on this clunker.

And of course we all understand film making is a business first and art second.

However, all that aside, this remake of OMEN got off to a bad start with poor casting, bland performances and basically came across as FLAT.

It almost seems the whole crew from actors to director were almost embarassed and ashamed to be remaking this film.

It just gave that feeling when watching it.

I was almost tempted to pull out the original and watch them side-by-side at the same time because unless I am mistaken the dialoge and scenes seem IDENTICAL as thought the exact 1970s shooting script was used for this remake.

Watching this DVD (before we ejected it about 60 minutes in) was like looking at a polaroid picture of a beautiful woman as compared to having the real thing standing inches in front of you.

The remake was just flat and lifeless.

It would be more fun to see Hollywood do remakes of movies that had potential the first time, but failed.... to see if they can rework them and make a better film the second time.

1975's DOC SAVAGE comes to mind.

It was an early version of what Indiana Jones later became and SHOULD have been good since it was based on a popular 1930's pulp here.

Instead the film was campy and died at the box office.

It would be good for example to see a film like that done properly.
1169896
Rehash of many portions of the original movies not as good as the first movie but better than the second.  The new guy is adequate but not JS.
3119617
I was hoping for something better.  I was pretty disappointed.  They made unnecessary changes to the original story.  Most of the acting was horrible.  Robo-shredder was ridiculous.
4123186
I was disappointed with the changes to Fanny's character and the "spicing up" that was done to the storyline. The changes made were purely commercial. The old BBC version is a truer adaption of Austen's novel.
745661
They destroyed the original story, there was virtually no character development,  and it had a hollow feeling to it.  I get changing things for a remake to make it more suitable for the new generation and changes in technology, etc., but this was just awful.
3252961
Too silly. No where near as funny/ good as the original.
2189270
The remake is a good attempt at the original but the minor changes and the casting choice of  Leslie Nielsen was a poor choice ( but I've never cared for him)