About the only reason I did enjoy this movie, was the cast, as they tried their best to flesh out unidimensional characters in a script that sadly, tries a little bit too hard to pay an homage to the original (and to a couple more films), but that also had a few twists now and then. I'm not comparing at all my experience as a 12 years-old kid watching the original. Back then, an uncle of mine (who passed away some years ago, God keeps his soul) was the manager at our town's largest cinema (a nice 70mm film 2000 seater that has been torn down since), and used to let me watch for free (and most of the times, all by myself) every single new film they got, before it opened, from 1980 up to 1987, when I moved to another city. Now, 1982 was for me a GREAT year: Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan, Blade Runner, Tron, The Thing, E.T, Conan: The Barbarian, Creepshow, The Dark Crystal, Firefox... almost every Saturday opening was a fantastic movie, in every genre. For the original Poltergeist, I was alone in the cinema, scared shitless. For this version... let's say I was checking boxes (while eating my popcorn) regarding how they got this or that from the first one, and the cast made me enjoy the experience. Have we seen way too many movies, that now we have become so cynical, expecting so much at every opening?. I don't know. I'm still missing watching in awe brand new movies on a huge screen all by myself as a kid. Having said that, I'm sure that there are some scenes cut from the theatrical release that I hope will get into the Blu-ray. It's a fine move, and it stands by itself when we cease to compare it.

unlikeable characters in a movie that is a poor remake of a great film that even after 30 plus years still is far more scary and satisfying than this retread

It would be hard to judge the movie without comparing it with the old one by the title alone, but with all borrowed scenes and lines, I fear this is impossible - and that's bad, because they're putting themselves against something quite brilliant. What I kept thinking while watching is that this is too "literal", meaning they've set up these scary scenes without setting the proper psychological mood for them, making them less than effective in scarying the audience. I missed that. Some of the scenes were really well done visually, but utterly unemotional and therefore, just not not scary.

Not a bad movie, but it didnt scare like I hoped it would, or at all... At least its better than other remakes I've seen in past.

I've always felt that overuse of special CGI effects doesn't help make shows better and could instead make the story a lil too exaggerated. This movie proves my point, well sorta. But i definitely prefer the old/original version.