Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

Claudio Carvalho The eleven year-old girl Alex Grant witnesses her mother being raped and killed at home by the carnival clown Louis Seagram (Larry Miller). Many years later, Alex (Bobbie Phillips) works with her younger sister Sandra Grant (Shawnee Smith) in the Mermaid Inn that was owned by their mother. Out of the blue, Alex is attacked by Louis that was hidden in the backseat of her car on the day of the anniversary of the death of her mother. She struggles with Louis and drives her car into the sea to protect her sister. Then she swims back to the shore on the area of a carnival. From this moment on, Alex has nightmares and daydreams with Louis. What is happening with Alex?"Carnival of Souls" (1962) is a low-budget cult movie with a story that seems to be an episode of "Twilight Zone". "Carnival of Souls" (1998) is not a remake and only borrows the title and a small part of the original storyline. The plot is boring and totally predictable, sort of a combination of "Jacob's Ladder" with "Carnival of Souls". The result is an average and forgettable horror film. My vote is five.Title (Brazil): "Parque Macabro" ("Macabre Park")

utgard14 In-name-only remake of the classic '60s horror film. The original was a unique, atmospheric film that had some genuinely creepy and scary moments, made on a shoestring budget with no frills. This one is just a generic bland '90s horror flick with nothing to recommend about it unless you are fans of the cast. Bobbie Phillips is very attractive and I can't fault anyone wanting to look at her for 90 minutes. But beyond that, she brings very little to the table. Genre favorite Shawnee Smith is a little better and even gets to sing, but that's not enough to save this mess. Larry Miller, more known for his comedic roles, plays a disgusting cliché killer clown. Director and writer Adam Grossman clearly spent a total of five minutes thinking the plot to this one up. If you have seen the original, this movie will just tick you off. If you haven't, this will likely put you to sleep. Avoid at all costs. "Presented" by Wes Craven, which is rarely a good sign as he'll put his name on just about anything.

hqahtani There are many people who have unrealistic expectations for a sequel, remake, or reboot. In some cases, perhaps they fell in love so deeply with the original that no film could impress them equally, or near equally. There are also cases where a film may have a low rating but be horribly good, or just misunderstood. Let me assure anyone who reads this that neither of these scenarios apply to this film. It is just unequivocally BAD, and this is one case where everyone is RIGHT. However, you may have appreciated the genius of the 1962 version to such an extent that you're willing to take the risk. That was my case. Here is what the 1998 version has in common with the 1962 film: a girl crashing into water, the same girl having what appears to be some psychotic breakdown, and a girl who eventually realizes that she has died. On the surface those appear to be similar enough to make this interesting, but it simply ISN'T. The acting is one level above bad, the characters are simply uninteresting, and the plot is convoluted. On the other hand, the brilliance of the original was in its dead simple, incredibly effective, no-frills execution that seemed unlike anything before or, to some extent, after it.Here is my genuine advice. Most people probably started with the black and white 1962 release. If you're really yearning for a new take on the film watch the colorized version of it rather than this; it will be more fulfilling. Whereas the original had me captivated from start to finish, I fell asleep on two separate occasions while trying to finish this (no matter how bad a movie is, I generally see it through to the end).If you've seen both the color and black and white release of the original, then simply watch one of them again. Go read a book. Slam your head against a wall. Really, pretty much anything is more stimulating than watching this.

rapmasterwd40 The film is a journey through the psyche of a woman (Alex) with a traumatic past and emotional scars. There are numerous switches between realities which result in Alex thinking she is losing her mind. Viewers can be forgiven for not understanding what is going on, but that is kind of the point! What you are supposed to understand is the emotional roller-coaster ride... It kind of reminded me of The Butterfly Effect, but without any control and more random (continuous) jumping through memories/realities.Also worth noting is that I watched the movie a second time and realised that there are several cryptic messages in the dialogue throughout this movie, which help make the ending easier to accept.Bobbie Phillips was great in this movie and she had to be as the entire plot is driven towards the viewer having sympathy towards her character. The rest of the cast was adequate (excpet the guy who played Michael, he was pretty bad). The effects weren't great and should have been better for a movie made in 1998. I wouldn't say it was a bad ending, but it definitely could have been better. However, it was generally well scripted and well directed.This film isn't really scary at all, so I wouldn't recommend it to traditional horror fans. It's not by any means "easy viewing" either, so I would recommend it to people who like to think about what they are watching and have patience to let a story unfold. Also fans of psychological thillers.Not a classic by any means, but I enjoyed it a lot and will most likely watch it again in the future. 7/10