The Omen

 (1,081)
5.51 h 49 min2006X-RayUHDR
When the U.S. ambassador to England begins to suspect that his son is the Anti-Christ, he must wrestle with the decision to kill the child before he can create a counterfeit kingdom on earth.
Directors
---
Starring
Liev SchreiberJulia StilesMia Farrow
Genres
HorrorSuspenseDramaFantasyAdventureAction
Subtitles
English [CC]
Audio languages
English
Rentals include 30 days to start watching this video and 48 hours to finish once started.
Add to Watchlist
Add to
Watchlist
By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms. Sold by Amazon.com Services LLC.
Write review

Reviews

4.3 out of 5 stars

1081 global ratings

  1. 67% of reviews have 5 stars
  2. 14% of reviews have 4 stars
  3. 10% of reviews have 3 stars
  4. 3% of reviews have 2 stars
  5. 6% of reviews have 1 stars
Sorted by:

Top reviews from the United States

Cupcake Reviewed in the United States on August 3, 2022
5.0 out of 5 stars
Perfect condition!
Verified purchase
I had to buy a second copy of this for my DVD collection, and it came in perfect shape and has been a great second addition to my collection.
Patrick L JamesReviewed in the United States on November 4, 2017
4.0 out of 5 stars
Pictures probably have bad marketing on their end
Verified purchase
First off right away I'm going to just say that when I realized that this is almost 12 years old and I went to see it June 6th 2006, the day it came out which, by the way I did not know that until after I saw the film people were offended that it was released on 666.. Pictures probably have bad marketing on their end.

I know that people our eyes are one way about this movie or the other meaning that they like it a lot or if they don't like it at all. I remember buying it when it came out on DVD somewhere around Halloween 2006. I really like the movie. I thought it was very good and creepy and I know that back in the 70s, which was people are born, but this and the exorcist were considered the scariest possessed or evil child like movies. But as with the omen when I always found interesting was. To not having a soul being the son of the devil and looking so innocent and pure, but the eyes are so evil at the same time. Then, at the time of both releases, even though I think there were 40 years apart, they still caused controversy. Which I don't think when you look at remakes they are very well executed or the cast is that great I can clearly say that this has a very good cast whether people say well Julia stiles is not popular anymore or of recent movies have not been good that's up to interpretation however if you look at the time this was Which I don't think when you look at remakes they are very well executed or the cast is that great I can clearly say that this has a very good cast whether people say well Julia stiles is not popular anymore or of recent movies have not been good that's up to interpretation however if you look at the time this was enterprise and so was Leiv Shrieber and they also had me a fare who was in one of the best evil child movies of its time and still classic. Rosemary's baby. So as we all know, child is. Praised and grown up with the thorn family, the father is high up in politics, I can't remember if he's a company Senate or what his level in the government is and you know that they live a high rich, lush lifestyle. On the day of Damian. 6th for day his babysitter commits suicide in front of probably a 100 and more guests, saying this is all for you to a man after that more and more weird scary, crazy stuff happens. The violence towards his mother, who he already was talking about, she didn't feel close with them. Et cetera. And I don't want to mention one key thing because if you haven't seen it and it's a really good giveaway. But her but when he is around animals animals start attacking things and other people etc. And realize the baby center is there to help coach Emma long as he becomes more and more evil and also knows he is the son of Satan.

Would I recommend this movie? Yes, I would I really really like it, I actually own 2 copies because when I worked at the video store that was in my town before it closed. I purchased the full screen edition on DVD because my flat screen along with purchasing along with 1 to 4 on VHS. So all in all a that would say I like the movie I really would recommend it
3 people found this helpful
JohnReviewed in the United States on April 20, 2013
3.0 out of 5 stars
Solid Workman-Like Remake But **NOT** Up To The Original
Verified purchase
This review is not about the DVD or Blu-ray, it's about the film itself. I received an Amazon Instant Video rental of the 2006 remake free when I bought a Blu-ray of the original 1976 classic with Gregory Peck and Lee Remick from Amazon . . . a welcome feature they offer free with the purchase of many of their Blu-rays. Was a bit puzzled at first and a quick search of Amazon revealed they do not have the 1976 version in their Instant Video catalog, only the 2006 remake. Viewed it streamed to my (modest) home theater Blu-ray player and 46" 1080p HDTV. I have a very high speed connection and home network; viewing was not quite as crisp as a well done Blu-ray, but better looking with less noticeable compression than my local Comcast cable service would deliver, and certainly much better than a DVD (even with the player's upscaling). So much for the technical aspects, for which I'd give it 4.5 stars.

This gets 3 stars because this 2006 remake is not up to the level of suspense and palpable tension generated and delivered by the original 1976. I would be wondering why bothering to remake The Omen, except it's obvious as with other recent remakes (e.g. Psycho) that the producers and studios are hoping to turn profits on them by leveraging on the reputations of the original classics. The Omen was not adapted from any novel or short story (the novel was written from the screenplay and released just before the original film for marketing the film). This remake is, at best, an "update" with near zero revision of the original screenplay incorporating the current technologies of personal laptop computers, cell phones, etc. Overall it's a solid workman-like product without any serious flaws, but it doesn't emotionally deliver the sense of horror and dread the original does, even now, as I've also viewed the original again, after seeing this one. The acting of Liev Schreiber (Ambassador Thorn) and Julia Stiles (Mrs. Thorn) is good, but it's not the chemistry or level of Peck and Remick. There's no comparison between the two Damien's. The 2006 iteration leaves much to be desired as he clearly does not have or express near the evil ominousness of the 1976 Damien. Was it the casting, directing, or a combination of the two? How the 2006 actor delivers in future films will tell. The one standout is the nanny, Mrs. Blaylock, played by Mia Farrow. Her facial expressions, mannerisms and dialog delivery very clearly portray the evil ominousness Damien lacks. Remaking or updating a standout classic is high risk for everyone, the studio, producers, actors and director(s). In this one, they did not fail (other than Damien IMHO), but they clearly did not rise to nearly the level of the original, which is sad. Even without the original to compare and contrast, this film would never have garnered any Academy, BAFTA or Golden Globe nominations, but it would have fared OK in its genre with mixed to mildly positive critical response. It's the presence and comparative power of the original that has justifiably generated the mildly negative critical response to the remake.

See the original, and if you're going to buy one, buy the original, it's better overall. Rent this one for a rainy night and appreciate Mia Farrow's nanny portrayal.
One person found this helpful
ApathyCurveReviewed in the United States on September 26, 2021
5.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent
Verified purchase
Because I was raised in it, I am a sucker for horror movies based on Judeo-Christian mythology. While I stopped believing in my late teens, the psychological imprint it created in me as a child makes me vulnerable to the spine tingles when I watch a good horror show based on that mythos. The Omen and The Exorcist are my two favorites, and this remake does justice to the original. I normally approach re-makes with a great deal of skepticism, but in this case I was pleasantly surprised. They did not try to "re-imagine" the story, but instead stayed very close to the original, in many cases even using similar wardrobes and filming locations. The casting was spot-on and the cinematography well done. If you liked the original, chances are good you'll like this one as well. It's not original and doesn't try to be; it's more of an homage.
6 people found this helpful
EllisScottPollardReviewed in the United States on March 22, 2016
2.0 out of 5 stars
A Good Argument Against Remakes
Verified purchase
From what I gather, the marketing ploy of releasing this remake of The Omen on 6/6/06 was too good of a publicity maneuver to pass up for the studio. The movie wouldn't be so awful if they had in any way, shape, or form contributed something new other than the addition of some cheap scare tactics--most of which take the form of horrid looking masks (that don't add any depth to the story) or jump scares. The mystery of the original Omen is already revealed, so there is very little tension. What tension remains is, again, due to cheap tactics that don't revitalize or expand on the source material in any meaningful way. What kept me from giving this film one star were the performances given by David Thewlis (who occupies the David Warner role) and Mia Farrow (who takes on the Evil Nanny part played so well by Billie Whitelaw). The script is so poorly written that it's hard to know if Julia Stiles is giving a bad performance or if she's trying to salvage some depth from an already awkwardly written part. Liev Schreiber is absolutely awful, and that qualification isn't even taking into account a comparison of his part to Gregory Peck's performance in the same role.

I think the major problem lies in the conception and written execution of the story itself. At this point, we all know exactly what Damien is. In the original version, there was a slight air of mystery surrounding the child's origins and a great degree of detailed horror as the revelations were presented. To blandly reiterate the story without new angles or dimensions, that would maintain a degree of faithfulness but also expand upon a story with which we are all quite familiar, shows the film to be a very deliberate cash-grab. The direction adds nothing visually provocative. Aside from the superfluous addition of extraneous ghoulish imagery--which, had it been more relevant to the story, might not have seemed as gratuitously vulgar and pandering--the direction seems amateurish. For example, we aren't given a really lucid understanding of the mansion where the Thorn's live. While you could argue that this is to unsettle the viewer's sense of space, you need to have a certain pattern of setting in place so that the audience can actually be unsettled when the setting is changed. The direction also lacks any depth: everything is far too continuous well lit to the point that the obvious lack of thematic explorations is illumined by the visuals.

One final note about the performances: it is hard to sympathize with the plight of the parents because they never seem to exert any emotional attachment to their son or even give the audience a reason to care about their individual plights outside of their lives as parents. While Stiles's distance was an inconspicuous plot choice, and not really a good one, Schreiber relies on the dialog of his character to convey his internal conflict without actually putting any effort into creating an emotional connection; there is absolutely no continuity in his approach. Both of the leads are bad, but it does appear (and I use that word tentatively) that Stiles is at least trying. Schreiber is lucky in that his scenes are largely bolstered by Davis Thewlis's performance, which manages to be quite endearing. Mia Farrow's very convincing update of Mrs. Baylock is quite nuanced in many ways, but, and I really fault the writing here, she is written as more covertly evil without the subtlety. Given this, Farrow's performance can seem over-the-top and transparent at times. Still, she does great work with what she's given...to the point that you sympathize with her over Damien's dull, vacant, mostly unfeeling, and quasi-robotic parents.

The movie's a poor dilution with nothing new to speak of but the cheapest and shallowest contemporary horror conventions. I'm not opposed to remakes, but I find thoughtless attempts like this to be a transparent cashing in on a better film's legacy for nothing more than a profit.
9 people found this helpful
Khristine JacksonReviewed in the United States on September 8, 2021
4.0 out of 5 stars
Same Old .. Same Old
Verified purchase
This is a "Re-make"... same old formula as before. The cast did a good job... It's just that the late "Gregory Peck,Lee Remick " and other's created a mold. Hollywood it's time to GROW up... stop remaking ... CLASSIC film's. Who are you fooling..? People born after 1990..? Wow...!! Friends it's important that you support all movie's... music and several forms of entertainment .. Just don't forget about the movie's that were ORIGINAL..
3 people found this helpful
AdamReviewed in the United States on September 7, 2021
4.0 out of 5 stars
I was pleasently surprised with this remake!
Verified purchase
Loved the Original so the remake was an easy decision. I loved the way they used updated angles and effects to bring this awesome movie to todays standards. The director had a great vision and used originality at key scenes in the picture. I would reccomend this movie to any fan!
PBReviewed in the United States on September 17, 2015
3.0 out of 5 stars
Pales in Comparison
Verified purchase
This remake is inferior in almost every way to the original. The special effects and makeup may be better at times, but that's about it.

The nanny doesn't have the eeriness of the original nanny. Damien's original mother was better. The father and photographer are OK, but even the original dog was creepier.

The original Damian outwardly looks and acts like a normal kid, even a bit cute...but you can SENSE his his evil - the scene at the zoo (the equivalent scene in the remake is not nearly as good), his slight and subtle grin, his terror when approaching the church. It's precisely this subtly that makes him so creepy, evil disguising itself as innocence.

The new Damian, on the other hand, is more like an actor trying too hard to be "bad," and instead comes across as an angry, grouchy kid who scowls throughout the whole movie. He's more annoying than creepy. Take the church scene, as an example. *Spoiler* The original Damian begins shaking in fear as he approaches, and eventually latches onto his mother in sheer terror. Portraying a church as something terrifying to a child makes that child seem inherently evil, and is done in a brilliantly subtle way.

In contrast, new Damien seems to get angrier and angrier, instead of scared, as he approaches the church. The effect is ruined, as he attacks his mother when they get close, seemingly not out of terror, but out of rage.

Then, of course there's the soundtrack, which I think MAKES the original movie. The new soundtrack left no impression on me at all.

So, why the three stars? I would give 2.5 if I could. It would be an OK movie (especially for free on Prime), but I can't help comparing it to the original.
5 people found this helpful
See all reviews