Poltergeist 4?
Ok now look. I’m one of those people who really doesn’t mind the idea of remakes and sequels. Sometimes they can be amazing… often not… but the point is you take each movie as a movie… and judge each one on it’s own merits… original or sequel or remake.
However, even I have my limits. Word it that they’re actually looking at producing a Poltergeist 4. Oh sweet heavens. Our good friends over at Horror-Movies.Ca give us this:
So much confusion. A few months ago a rumor was circulating the web that their was a Poltergeist remake in the works. You will recall that MGM debunked the rumor by saying and I quote:
“there is NO truth to this…it is all bullshit…”
NOW the word from MGM is we are going to be getting a Poltergeist IV. Charles Cohen told our friend David quote:
“We are working on a Poltergeist idea, and hope to have some news to announce shortly. Stay tuned.”
My question is… “What’s the point?” Why bother making a Poltergeist 4? What… what the epic saga not drawn to a proper close? Where the subsequent Poltergeist movies huge blockbusters? Did Poltergeist 3 leave us with too many unanswered questions that we’ve all been DYING to have answered? I mean come on… does anyone other than myself have the misfortune of even remembering parts 2 and 3?
Look, if you’ve got an idea for a good solid horror flick with ghosties… then just do it as it’s own film. I know sometimes attaching a movie to an existing franchise can help marketing… but this is ridiculous. And to be honest, calling it Poltergeist 4 could actually HURT it’s marketing.
What do you guys think?
11 Comments, Comment or Ping
R. Jackson
Remaking the original wouldn’t be a bad idea. Of course, everyone knows the big graveyard twist now.
Jan 29th, 2007
Darren J Seeley
I’d much rather have a big screen version of ‘Potergiest: The Legacy”, but that’s such a long shot. As for sequels to Poltergiest, I could see it. Sort of. A new actress in the role that the late Heather O Rourke played? Yeah, maybe. Cameo by Craig T Nelson and JoBeth Williams? Okay.
On second thought, I don’t want to see a damned thing. It’s all a nutty idea and remains in development hell. It’s just another lazy bones by the numbers idea that will exploit the namesake.
Jan 29th, 2007
Kaonashi
When I think of Poltergiest, I think of the real tragedy behind the films. Didn’t all 3 of the actors playing the children die?
Jan 29th, 2007
Kristina
Poltergeist’s time has come and gone. Younger audiences probably have never even seen the original, and younger people are the ones who drop their allowance to hang in the theater(hell, look at how much that pile of shit Epic Movie made last weekend). People aren’t into this kind of horror anymore. I remember you guys were talking on the AE about how horror trends are cyclical. We had our Scream knockoffs, we had our remakes, and now we’re into grindhouse gore. Nobody wants this movie, I haven’t heard a clamoring for another Poltergeist, so don’t do it. Simple ecomonic lesson of supply and demand. If your audience doesn’t demand, you’d better not supply it.
Jan 29th, 2007
R. Jackson
Even though it’s a Tobe Hooper film, the original Poltergeist has more of a Spielberg feel to it (for good reasons, of course). Its scares are kind of cutesy with sort of sparkly, colorful special effects. About the creepiest thing in the movie is the scene where the guy’s face cooks and even that’s sort of played for laughs. You could take exactly the same script and make a film that’s much more hardcore and terrifying with a much darker tone. I don’t think the premise is that dated…but Spielberg’s style of filmmaking is so dated and cloying that it’s impossible to think of the film without remembering that summer of ET and Poltergeist.
Jan 29th, 2007
Kaneda979
I think making a part 4 is a bad idea too. Like you said, no point to it. But, if done right, it could show all these Poltergeist wannabes coming out of late how to actualy be scary. The first Poltergeist scarred the crap out of me. To this day that scene with the clown and the tree coming to life bother me some. But might have to do with the fact that when I first saw it I was still really young, just a kid.
I thought the 2nd one had some good scarry parts too, but most of it was forgetable. And the 3rd one was just a lame excuse to make another one. Which I fear this 4th might be too. Just another sad atempt by hollywood to make some money cuz they’ve run out of ideas. Atleast if it was a remake it wouldn’t seem so bad and it’s been well long enuff of time to do a remake.
Ohwell, guess we’ll just have to wait and see how it turns out. They just better make it feel enuff like the better parts of the series, otherwise it will be just another lame ghosts scarring people in the story, but not really doing anything else to them kind of movie.
Jan 30th, 2007
Joseph J. Lucas,III
I want The Poltiergist ghosts to fight warewolf’s
Apr 11th, 2007
Kevin Y
remaking the original wouldn’t be too bad of an idea, but for a 4th movie…what if the ending WASN’T so happy? What if they really got what they wanted, Carol Anne? Hmm I don’t know…just a suggestion.
Aug 3rd, 2007
Dan C
I think it would be a good idea to make a 4th installment to kind of close out the story. remeber, the very last second of part 3.. kane started laughing and lightning struck or something? I say they make the 4th and call it a day. by the way, I hold the rights to poltergeist4.com
and I was contacted by a party affiliated with MGM asking me my intentions of selling it, so i put it up for sale, perhaps they are inquiring because they may do a film after all? we will just have to wait and see.
Nov 15th, 2007
Michael Joyce
You want to know something, I really don’t think they should make Poltergeist 4 and here’s my reason. Now the first movie, it laid the ground work and was full of exitment because it was so creepy more then any other movie in years and it was so graphic. The tree part worked perfect too, the movie was kind of action packed. The second movie, what I have to say is that it did a great job, it was scary, fun, and had some cool effects. The thing is, it’s scary but least scarrier then the first movie but this movie is still one of my favorite even though they could have been the same. It’s not the changed story line, It just was supposed to be better but wasn’t and they just felt like they had to turn down the creepy volume a bit I saw. And now the third movie, this one I say had to be the least scarriest of the entire series and this was nothing great. I mean some parts were ok, but you see what happens with sequels, things go hectic. These are my reasons why Poltergeist 4 won’t work. I mean don’t get me wrong about Heather O’Rourke, she played a cute child and still did good with her character. But bits of the story in the third film were nothing better. Anyway the series is over, so there isn’t going to be a fourth movie. Since the second and third were least scarrier, they should keep it this way and not move on with the series. Go ahead and make more Poltergeist movies, but you will screw up much worst I’m pretty sure. That’s all I have to say, good day!
Mar 30th, 2008
Daos
If Poltergeist 4 were to go into production; I think a more ideal storyline would be to revolve around Carol Anne’s brother Robby Freeling. Perhaps put in a twist that he became a paranormal expert and ghost hunter based upon his experiences as a child in the first two movies. Of course; the script can build off of that simple base.
Apr 20th, 2008
Reply to “Poltergeist 4?”