उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

This movie was based on a true story the Johnsons from Tuckerman AR ...Charles and Sharon Johnson ...house was built on a cemetery ...these are my parents the house is the real deal still standing today ...there is also a short story wrote about my family and lots of newspaper articles that support evidence ...very cool to be a part of this and have a film wrote and directed about my family ...course it's made for TV a lot of it didn't happen ...we are actually twin brothers not brother and sister ...the hauntings were real ..the were very real ...I actually started a paranormal investigation team as a result of all this ...if your looking for the real story behind this movie ...look me up Off The Grid Paranormal ...easy to find ...

I am particularly attracted to haunted house and ghost movies, even bad ones, but this movie which is supposed to be documenting the true story of Doretta Johnson's experiences in Madison,Indiana has every contrived haunted house plot point from every haunted house movie ever made, and a few new ones. There's the bodies buried on the property (it's not built on a cemetary as some commenters have thought), there's too many special effects, a crazy psychic, a disbelieving husband and a child in danger. Toss on top a mother whose stories are so crazy they have to be delusions and doctors more concerned in her than the truth and you have a movie that isn't really worth watching. One the plus side, Sharon Lawrence really has some good moments and Alex D. Linz shines as a true child actor. The hauntings aren't very scary, though, but the movie does push maybe too hard for the emotional scenes. A lot of it, however, I find just too ridiculous. The plot is just not very realistic or believable. This is what happens when you push a script too fast into production. If you want the real story, check out the re-enactment on "Haunted Lives" or the investigations on "Sightings."

Pattie and Charles and their two young children Molly and Jonathan move into a brand new house in suburbia. Soon, little colored lights are flying around and the bath tub is belching up blood. When little Jonathan nearly drowns in the same tub and is levitated above it right before Pattie's eyes, she seeks assistance from a local whackjob psychic woman. Their investigation leads them to a little old lady who informs them that she once lived on the land where the new house now stands, and that there is a family plot on the property. She also informs them that her brother was murdered many years ago by their father, and now it seems as though the wicked ghost has the same intentions for Jonathan. But Charles, concerned for Pattie's mental state, has her admitted to a hospital for psychiatric observation and takes the children home. Pattie now has to find a way to escape from the hospital and save her son before history repeats itself.

Yaaawwn. This is a very blatant rip-off of Poltergeist, watered down for television and starring a bunch of people who look like they should be on the Lifetime Afternoon Movie instead. How the hell Beau Bridges ended up in this silly mess is beyond me - he deserves better. The special effects are lame, the dialog is so corny it's painful and any seasoned horror fan is going to be bored stiff by this predictable tale.

Skip it.

I love ghost stories and movies but it feels like it would have been an outright lie if they had said this was BASED on "true events" instead of INSPIRED by "true events". So I'm picturing the creators sitting around discussing actual ghost stories and wanting to make something spooky and handing it over to someone who probably only worked in advertising before who had a limited knowledge of the supernatural, that being movies like Poltergeist. Throw in a mid-1990s daytime television budget and this is what ended up being trodded out.

This review was INSPIRED by actual reviews. I know that didn't make sense.

When I first saw the title of this film on my T.V. list I expected the classic movie made in the forties. It started out in color which meant it was just a remake. There was even a large tree in the opening moments. Much like the original, a tree is very important. Then just as quick as a flash of lightening, anything classic about this film disappeared. Suddenly the plot started to remind me of "Poltergeist." I also loved the first 2 "Poltergeists" but this was NO POLTERGEIST. The ending was really the best part of the film. It featured the strength of a women in mortal combat. Would she win or lose against the supernatural? I know that the writers of this film lost in their battle for something original.

I saw this movie on TV last Halloween. I'm not saying it was a bad movie but then again I'm not saying it was good either. It was just okay.

I was hoping to see something really creepy and scary and that's NOT what I got. The story was pretty good, it had one or two spooky moments but it was not a scary movie. And I'm a person that scares very easily. It also had a sort of a cheeseball ending too. The effects were good but it was over done and it just wasn't that cool. But it was interesting.

I haven't seen very many scary movies in my lifetime. Not as many as I would like to anyway. But this definitely wasn't a movie I would buy.

Beau Bridges,(Charles Johnson), tried his best to believe his wife, Pattie Johnson,(Sharon Lawrence), that their brand new house was having strange things happen in the bathroom and closets. Charles Johnson, was a truck driver and had very little time to worry about his wife's problems, having lost a child during her pregnancy. There is a tree in the film, that looks like a pretzel all bend out of shape, and I really think the director's brain was twisted just like it. The actors did their very best to carry this film on their backs, namely: Sharon Lawrence and Beau Bridges; they both must have had plenty of laughs making this film, because in some ways, it was comical and stupid. The name I viewed this film under, was called: "The Victim of the Haunt"! WOW

I'm amazed to see how low this movie scores in the IMDB rating (currently 4.3), it is a very good movie; it's like a light version of Poltergeist in which the main character is taken for crazy when she speaks about the paranormal things occurring at her home.

The tension gets higher and higher until the last moment. Best of all, it's based on true events

I certainly recommend this movie

I believe the writers were inspired by older films to write this script and it's characters - unimaginative. The little boy will smile and follows the ghost sometimes (he reminds me a little bit of the boy in The Shining at times). The father with an axe, although Beau Bridges' characters didn't go crazy he had to use an axe on the door, reflections of The Amityville Horror and The Shining here. The psychic and the ending of the film reeks of Poltergeist.

In these types of films, why is it the neighbors will never see all the bright blinding "strobe lights" and all the screaming from the family being terrorized? This usually happens at the end/climax of the film. Yea sure blame it on sleep but all that screaming and loud "ghost noises" should have awakened one neighbor up! LOL.

This movie has a family-styled film written all over it... especially the colorful orbs from the little boy ghost. And the cutesy moments that happen, in particular with the mom, psychic and ghosts.

It's far from being a good haunted house movie but it's got a few moments of being fun. - Jeff Bridges is good in this one, he seems like an average dad with a wife seemingly going "mad".

5/10

Yeah it might fit some of the clichés like a father who doesn't believe his wife until the last second, the power of love to drive away demons, and the reclusive fortune teller who ends up saving the day, but i found it an easy entertaining watch. Maybe it has something to do with how old the film is, it's kind of nostalgic and cheesy.

There could've been more moments of horror though which would've made it stand out a little more. Some of the graphics made the film look a little too cheap but I guess back then it was something far advanced and out of this world so I really can't hate on that.

Whew! Imagine how bad this movie would have been if not for Beau Bridges and Sharon Lawrence. I mean, it was pretty bad. It's essentially a compilation video with clips from several other horror movies. Nothing original to be found in this tepid made-for-TV flick. I probably would bailed after the first half hour but both Bridges and Lawrence were just damn fine. They never phoned it in even though they MUST have known what they were doing was pure cheese. They gave it their all and that made the movie almost bearable. Pretty much everyone else in this movie was a cookie cut out. There's the brash ominous psychic we've seen in one million other movies. There are all the familiar neighbors, the men dorky, the women a gaggle of gossipers. You got your basic psychiatrist to tell the poor damsel it's all in her head, the little boy, the little girl and even a nice doddering old lady to fill out the cast. None of it worth a damn, but by gum, Beau and Lawrence put some effort into it so I'm gonna do the same. I'll give it a five because it's not the most terrible thing I've seen in spite of all the cornball writing and tired old tropes.

Story 1.00/2 Acting 1.50/2 Direction & Pace 2.50/4 Entertainment 1.00/2

Total 6.00/10.

"The Haunting of Patricia Johnson," a 1996 TV horror movie, is the 'Poltergeist' of the B-movie neighbourhood. It's got all the spooky ingredients; however, it's more like a distant cousin than the Spielberg classic's twin. If you're in the mood for a dose of eerie nostalgia and a few unintentional chuckles, this might be your cup of witch's brew.

The movie falls smack-dab into the 'Poltergeist' sub-genre, but let's not kid ourselves - "The Haunting" is not Spielberg-level horror. There's too much déjà vu between the two due to glaringly similar events, making you wonder if the ghosts and the scriptwriters have run out of new tricks.

One thing that stands out is the cast, who appear to have taken the 'no small parts, only small actors' motto to heart. Even the lowest members of the cast deliver solid performances, meaning nobody really stands out, making for a perfectly harmonious ensemble that enables the viewer to stay immersed in the story.

The direction is reasonably sound, but it's hard to ignore the déjà vu - once again. Those moments, like the run down the hallway, make you almost expect it to elongate. I mean, a supernatural Airb'n'b property can have a little variety, right? And let's not overlook the cheesy special effects that feel swiped from a garage sale of '80s horror. The scary ghostly face in the dust cloud and warping doors are diamonds in the rough, but those rainbow lights? It's like the ghosts are throwing a disco party you didn't ask for.

In conclusion, "The Haunting of Patricia Johnson" is worth a view on a cold, wet winter's day when you're in the mood for some mildly spooky fun. It won't send shivers down your spine but will nicely pass the time. So, grab a cosy blanket and some popcorn, and heartily enjoy this ghostly ride - but don't expect any haunted dreams afterwards.

I read a post by aesgaard41 of Hendersonville, TN, about this movie. This person wrote: " There's the bodies buried on the property (it's not built on a cemetery as some commenters have thought)". I just watched this movie, for the second time, and it IS on a cemetery. Maybe not a public one, it's a family cemetery, but still a cemetery. The bodies are buried around a huge, contorted tree and Beau Bridges digs around the tree looking for proof that it was a burial ground. He finds several headstones before running into the house to his children. I really like movies with Beau Bridges and the woman who played the mother showed love for children. I have only 2 complaints. The first is one I have of many horror movies, is that the characters take too long to react. A few seconds may not sound like a long time but if your child was drowning in a tub, you wouldn't stand there in the hall and watch for a few seconds before deciding to run and help him out. The second is that the family proves the house is haunted and even wins a lawsuit (it's written at the end of the movie) but the house is shown being sold again, and still haunted. The family doesn't stop the next homeowners from suffering the same fate.

I just read another post on it. Khultman from New York writes: "the poltergeist, of course, turns menacing". That's incorrect. The "playful supernatural force" he/she refers to is the first of 2 spirits in the house. The first one is a playful little boy, the second is the father who murdered him. The second one is the menacing one, they are not the same spirit.

I thought that the performance of all of the actors, especially Sharon Lawrence. It really kept you on the edge of your seat. There was definitely not a dull moment throughout the entire movie. If you haven't seen this, then i suggest that you find some way to find where it will be shown.

I loved this movie. it was filmed 4 houses down from me, in my friend sean's house! i loved meeting the cast! my friends were all in it! like the boys playing with water guns and the girls roller'blading! i was even walking on the street in one scene! The orchard is not there anymore! now there is a much larger neighborhood connected to it! and we don't actually live on a family cemetary!(thank god!) if you have questions, please e-mail me!

Can anyone tell me where the house is in Tuckerman Arkansas that this took place with the Johnson family? I live in Tuckerman and just curious. Pretty interesting!