the audience applauded

Powerful

Perfect cast and a good story

hyped garbage

"Watcher in the Woods" original 1980 film was spooky and dark. I've not seen it for a long time now, since I was a kid, but it made an impression on me. Now I had to see the 2017 remake of the classic paranormal film. The "Watcher in the Woods" 2017 remake was so different like chocolate and cheese. There was nothing spooky, or anything mysterious. The fact it was often set at night doesn't give it moodiness alone. There was that enormous tree with a secret door that opened like a big mouth. The film looked more like a cheap fantasy with the most wooden acting I've ever seen. There wasn't a Welsh accent anywhere despite it being set in Wales. The American family were quite dull and the teenage girl was pretty obnoxious at the beginning. The poor little sister having to wear the same tight plaits in her hair, all the time, and didn't take them out at night. She appeared unenthusiastic and bored, in comparison to the other little sister of the 1980 film. The most spookiest bit of the 2017 film was unintentional as Anjelica Huston was playing Morticia Addams here still and her daughter Karen looked a bit like Wednesday' s Christina Ricci. The overall film was so bland and really weak.

When my family saw they remade this film we where so excited to see it. We figured now days they could do some very cool things graphic wise and make our already beloved oldie something better. Its got some underlying aspects of the old story line but sometimes it felt forced to try to make some scenes make sense. The family seemed to always have it out for there teenage daughter and you got none of the happy family closeness from them like the old film which helped ruin it for me. The family's lack of caring for each other made me not care for any of them. The mood in this film wasn't very spooky and the acting of the British characters was annoying to watch not mysterious the setting also wasn't that spooky. Maybe a retitle would be better for this film I am resentful it was remade like this the old version wasn't 10 stars but I would have given it a solid 8. Just a request for those of us who have our favored old time movies stay away from remaking Child of Glass rename this film something else Watcher in the woods it was not.

It is very very difficult to find a horror movie that is rated PG and creeps out the entire audience, but this is what U get with this film.Its a low budget deal with C acting in some characters and B+ in others. The music is done very well. Camera work was quite good. Suspense was there. The story line and plot is done well enough that my wife and I were kept engrossed. I can predict typical horror fans will down grade this gem for lack of blood, body counts, smoking/pot, macabre humor, and so on. Its a real tribute to all involved with this movie that it does not have many of the basic elements a modern horror movie of today generally has. I'm sure many viewers will decide that such a movie cannot even be classified as horror. And yet an honest viewer is forced to check the box marked 'spooky'.Ending is both predictable and original.

RELEASED TO TV IN 2017 and directed by Melissa Joan Hart (yes, Sabrina, the teenage witch), "The Watcher in the Woods" details events in Wales when a family from Cleveland, Ohio, move into a country manor for the summer while the mysterious owner, Mrs. Aylwood (Anjelica Huston), lives in the guest house. The teen daughter, Jan (Tallulah Evans), readily discerns something weird is going on, which is linked to Mrs. Aylwood's missing daughter, Karen (Rebecca Acock), from 36 years earlier. Jan investigates the mystery with the aid of a neighbor stud (Nicholas Galitzine) and her younger sister (Dixie Egerickx). I haven't read the book, but I have seen the troubled 1980/1981 Disney film (with three different endings). Unlike the Disney production, this is a TV movie and therefore lacks that one's blockbuster polish; it's also way more subdued. The question is, does it work on that level as a young adult mystery with low-key horror elements? It did for me, but then I can handle TV budget productions. If you remember the TV movies "Bay Coven" (1987) with Pamela Sue Martin or "Satan's School for Girls" (2000) with Shannen Doherty, this version of "The Watcher in the Woods" is along those lines in tone and production quality, although it's superior to the second one. Unlike the 1981 flick, which included a dilapidated chapel and an alien element (rolling my eyes), this rendition follows the book more closely.One of the best things about this version is Tallulah Evans as the fetching Nancy Drew-like protagonist; she looks like a young Amanda Bynes, but with a better figure, which the movie wisely accentuates (don't worry, no sleaze; this is a family-safe movie). The story contains quality human interest with Jan's relationship with the guy, her sister and, finally, Mrs. Aylwood. The unraveling of the mystery is interesting, particularly the link to the Black Death in Britain circa 1348 and the corresponding folksong "Ring around the Rosie." The explanation is more intelligible and interesting than the Disney film but, to be expected, not as entertaining (the extraterrestrial element). The authentic quaint British village locations are another plus, as is the balance between normal daylight sequences and haunting dusk/nighttime sequences. Another reviewer said there's no mood or mysterious ambiance. Hogwash. Unlike other haunting mystery flicks, this version of "The Watcher in the Woods" refuses to be one-note with its atmospherics. The haunting parts are augmented by a fitting piano-oriented score. As far as the final act goes, it's tough to pull off these kinds of supernatural sequences with a straight face. Filmmakers have to be careful with these types of scenes or they become more laughable than spooky. The ending of "Bay Coven," for instance, could go either way, depending on the person. For me, Melissa & crew pulled it off, which is different than saying the movie's flawless. It's not (for instance, the maw-of-the-tree effects are pretty lame), but it's a low-budget production made for Lifetime, after all, and you can nitpick any flick. THE FILM RUNS 87 minutes and was obviously shot in Britain, but I can't find info on the precise locations. WRITERS: Scott Abbott based on Florence Engel Randall's novel. GRADE: B/B- (6.5/10)