Oh, dear...

Rating: 2/10 (3 June 2000)

This was not a good film. That I am sure of. The alarm bells started to ring about 5 minutes into the film, with the ridiculous style of direction - trying to be all modern and cool and keep the pace going, but still missing something - making a massive point of emphasising all of the little 'signs' of what was to come - these are the sort of things any director who assumed even a little intelligence in their audience would make a lot more subtle.
After the intro, there were very few redeeming features. As I watched I continued to get bogged down in the really awful, long and drawn out deaths, which had me almost cringing in embarrassment, the laughable dialog and acting in places (Tony Todd's 'creepy' undertaker was unbelievably poor), and the sheer predictability of the film as a whole.
In summary? Don't bother - this is one of those awkward films - it's not good enough to be a fun film, and it's not bad enough to be a fun film. If you want to see a good horror film, get the Shining. (2/10)