Need an Account? Sign Up
 

The Messengers

Release Date: February 02, 2007
Director: Oxide and Danny Pang
Writer: Mark Wheaton (Todd Farmer, Stuart Beattie)
Starring: Kristen Stewart Dylan McDermott Penelope Ann Miller John Corbett
Studio: Columbia/Ghost House
Rating: PG13
Official Site: Click Here

Official Score


Average User Rating


Read 28 User Reviews


You have to be logged in to comment!
If you don't have an account register now for free! Your account allows you to post comments and reviews, upload videos and images, access or our forums, write personal blogs, and maintain your profile.


USERNAME:
PASSWORD:




Posted By: kidtwisted at 11:31pm, October 22, 2009

I liked what the Pang Bros did with this. It is creepy with a nice twist on a ghost story.


Posted By: evil_ash86 at 3:21am, October 17, 2009

when i first saw the cover of the DVD and saw Kristen Stewart, in thought the movie was gonna suck due to the quality of 'Zathura' and 'Twilight', also starring Kristen Stewart, but i gave it a shot because there's a chance that it would be good, and i was wrong.

the movie was bad, but not the worst. it wasn't scary, but it wasn't boring.

it was kinda entertaining, but too cliched. then again, that's what new scary movies are like these days.

Stewart's acting wasn't good, but she doesn't deserve a Razzie Award, at least she's trying. it's still entertaining, apart from the fact that it has a similar plot to 'The Shining' and 'The Amityville Horror'.



Posted By: caseynight88 at 8:51am, October 12, 2009

Aside from Kristen Stewart's rigid performance and the cliche'd moments, it had some pretty ok ones too.


Posted By: =AuTI_tAkahashi= at 8:20am, September 15, 2009

KIRSTEN STEWART MAKES THE WORST MOVIES EVER!!!!
Jumper, Twilight, Zathura, THIS, and upcoming suckfest New Moon.

Btw, the movie's crap. But you already know that. Well, except for the guy below me.



Posted By: kryptonite_soul at 8:43am, September 12, 2009

i liked it and i didnt see a problem with it, didnt think it was amazing and i know i wont remember it in 6 months time but i tought it was perfectly awright deffinetely worse haunted house movies out there


Posted By: trickytreats at 7:55pm, September 11, 2009

All I can remember about this movie is that I hated it.


Posted By: bloodnguts313 at 6:10am, September 10, 2009

Tis pritty good. Not like i thought but still ok.


Posted By: Mrs_Vorhees at 6:25pm, September 3, 2009

I was rather excited to watch the Messengers, because I love Kristin Sterwart. However, I wasn't impressed with this film. Some parts did make me jump, and I did like how the Little boy could see the "evil" but the plot was very weak and boring. I wouldn't recomend this movie to others.

2/10



Posted By: Dethbywafflez at 6:01pm, September 3, 2009

Its Sucks!!!


Posted By: derpdederp101 at 4:12pm, July 20, 2009

The Messengers- 2007

Good Parts- somewhat scary premise that's completely unoriginal

Bad Parts- almost everything: weak plot, not very scary at all,craptastic acting, slow paced and boring, not very original

Overall this seems like just another crappy PG-13 "horror" movie. skip this one

2/10



Posted By: Captain Trips at 9:49pm, July 14, 2009

The trailer looked good and it got my attention, however, the same could not be said for this movie. The plot was somewhat incoherent and even at the end it was confusing and think the Pangs were trying to go for an Americanized Japanese movie but like all others, it just does not work. They tried opening doors that were already opened and introduced us to a brand of horror that was already exposed to us, example: the crawling monsters on the ceiling. It worked last time because it was new, now its old.

The acting was somewhat horrible. There was emotion but not enough to drive the story and the plot line. The actors were a good choice but they needed to put more into what they were portraying. There were some points where the acting was unnecessary and overdone and some points were the actors and actresses were trying to act, but couldn't.

The "Scare Factor" was not there. It was interesting to see some of the attempts and yet you couldn't help but to get a little creeped out by some of the cheap scares. The earlier Pang Bros movies were scary because they had this special sound and it was new and nobody ever saw anything like it. This story, unlike the other Japanese horror stories, tried to have a sad story to it but never succeeded.

The few good things about this movie are the oddly surrealistic setting of a secluded sunflower farm and William B. Davis, who hasn't done anything in a while. I'm very glad to see him start in a movie, aside from some guest starts on other shows. It's a good movie but sort of cliché and not very scary.



Posted By: bufffiiieee at 1:00am, July 9, 2009

I liked it.


Posted By: my_anywhere at 1:11am, June 29, 2009

This movie had some good moments, I'm not going to lie, but altogether it was a great disappointment. From the trailer, I hoped this would be the next Grudge for me. It looked positively frightening, the acting looked above average, and I thought it might have a good story. The fact that it wasn't a remake (at least I haven't heard of it being a remake) was also an added bonus.

The fact of the mater was, there was too much done wrong with the production of this film. It didn't seem scary at all really. There were some moments taht had potental, but in the end I was only tense for one scene. Like I said before, it wasn't a remake, but something about the style made it seem like a movie that I had already seen previously. The special effects weren't all that great, and the biggest flaw? While trying to be completel unpredictable, it was utterly and terrifyingly predicatble!

This movie could have been really good, but it just ended up coming off as a J-horror wannabe. I actually found myself checking the time during my FIRST viewing of the film, which is never a good sign.



Posted By: Skratchy at 2:54pm, May 26, 2009

Yaaaaaawwwn. Suffers from being a part of a tired predictable genre

The sequel looks a lot better, and that's really saying something.



Posted By: LycanMatt at 11:42pm, January 30, 2009

I just watch this movie and I have to say it was pretty boring for me there are a few (like maybe 2) good parts but other then that nothing really. Also Kristen Stewart seemed kinda dumb to me in it I don't know.


Posted By: blairwitchasylum at 3:41pm, January 22, 2009

this movie was brill good scary bits


Posted By: Guitarded at 11:02pm, October 13, 2008

Wow. the preview made this movie look so good. it was a worse version of An American Haunting. Lame.


Posted By: JonnyRotten at 1:47pm, August 6, 2008

The best parts are in the trailer. Below average, but not the worst ever


Posted By: TheDeadMayTasteBad at 12:39am, August 4, 2008

"Just saw this movie on opening night. I read some other user comments which convinced me to go see it... I must say, I was not impressed. I'm so unimpressed that I feel the need to write this comment to spare some of you people some money.

First of all "The Messengers" is very predictable, and just not much of a thriller. It might be scary for someone under 13, but it really did nothing for me. The climax was laughable and most of the audience left before the movie's resolution.

Furthermore the acting seemed a little superficial. Some of the emotional arguments between the family were less convincing than the sub-par suspense scenes.

If you've seen previews for this movie, then you've seen most of the best parts and have a strong understanding of the plot. This movie is not worth seeing in the theaters." --banchi, imdb.com



Posted By: halloweenfan at 9:45pm, July 19, 2008

Ok but loses your interest fast.


Posted By: Lyssa284225 at 2:29pm, July 10, 2008

this movie was ok



Posted By: strangerslover at 12:54pm, June 26, 2008

No where as good as it looks.


Posted By: Domino19 at 11:37pm, June 8, 2008

I really wanted to see this movie at 1st but when i did it just wasnt as good as i though it would be. I enjoyed it but it could have been better.


Posted By: Butterkeuh at 6:55am, June 8, 2008

this movie is Watchable. it was not scary but I enjoyed watching it. the acting was good.


Posted By: imthecampkiller at 11:49pm, April 19, 2008

didnt like it it wasnt scary and the thing that got on my nerves the most was the fact that the baby was the best actor in this movie


Posted By: boralyl at 12:03pm, April 12, 2008

This film was not nearly as bad as I thought it was going to be. Going into the film I wasn't expecting much, mostly because of the PG-13 rating. It used a lot of the same ideas as many films before it. People move into haunted house, ghosts make noises and scare family, etc. Even with all of the cliche ghost movie plots the movie still played out well. The ghosts were genuinely creepy looking, crawling on ceilings and such. I was impressed. I would recommend this to any horror lover looking for something mediocre to watch while having a few brews, you won't be disappointed.


Posted By: Repo!Screams at 2:43pm, March 30, 2008

This movie scared the crap out of me!


Posted By: bob3701 at 7:47pm, March 29, 2008

I didn't think it was as bad as the official review made it out to be. Mind you it was not great but it did not suck. It is another film from Ghosthouse that seems to put out middle of the road horror films. Watchable.



THE HORROR HYPE METER
Excited to see this movie? Rate it here!

   1 Star

2 Stars 3 Stars 4 Stars 5 Stars

Total Votes:

Average Rating:

722




BD NEWS

Main
DVD
Indie
Video Games
Comic Books
MOVIES

Reviews
Coming Soon
Trailers
Movie Pit
FEATURES

Interviews
Articles
Podcasts
Dead Pixels
Graphic Content
COMMUNITY

My Profile
The Infected
Forums
Blogs
Galleries
ABOUT

BD Staff
Contact Us
News Feeds
Advertise

BLOODYDISGUSTING.COM/BLOODY-DISGUSTING.COM, GOHORRORMOVIES.COM © 2001-2008 BLOODY-DISGUSTING LLC - Privacy Policy - Terms Of Service