Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Powerful

Nice effects though.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

When a young nurse begins work at an isolated psychiatric ward, she quickly becomes fascinated with Patrick, a brain dead patient who is the subject of a scientist's unusual experiments. What starts as an innocent fascination quickly takes a sinister turn as Patrick begins to use his psychic powers to manipulate her every move, and send her life into a terrifying spiral out of control......Having never seen the original movie, I had nothing to compare it with, so I went in cold, and kept my expectations reasonably high, because it had Charles Dance in it, and he's a wonderful actor.And he's the best thing about this movie, which he and Griffiths save from becoming just an average horror movie. That little bit of class from those two, add a lot of gravitas to the overall narrative. The story is simple enough, comatose patient with telekinetic powers becomes obsessed with someone who has given him a little too much empathy, and instead of heeding the warnings from the matron, albeit in sinister form, she still endeavours to communicate with the titular character, and obviously he wants to return the empathy.But it's good fun, and particularly creepy in places, but alas, some of the effects can be very very good, and other of the effects can be bloomin' awful, see the doctor in car peril for some truly dreadful CGI.But these are minor quibbles for what is a nice little movie. The house is particularly creepy, and the final third is all out bonkers, but very tense never the less.If you can find it, see it, I highly recommend it.

Charles Dance provides his typical more than adequate performance; however, everyone else involved (except maybe the writer) is clearly an amateur. I was not scared at all, nor was I really ever nervous or intrigued. The writing was... eh... competent at best, but the plot had the intensity and pace of a talking statue. Sharni Vinson has been a joke any time she steps in front of a camera, come to think of it, none of the cast, other than Mr. Dance, should have been paid, like at all. The performances were not a surprise, making them consistent with the plot. Avoid... avoid... AVOID!!! Unless you're into reliving the trauma of a bad cinematic experience, or enjoy seeing a man's naked @$$... twice. I guess I must be into the former, definitely not the latter, but that's just me.

I liked the horror film Patrick very much, but its remake, Patrick: Evil Awakens, is a very entertaining film on its own merits, so I didn't need a "nostalgic filter" to enjoy it. The first thing I have to say is that Patrick: Evil Awakens is that it mustn't be taken very seriously, because its impulsive narrative freely flows between the solemnity and the satire, emulating '70s horror cinema with a beautiful cinematography, sinister architecture and bombastic music, not to mention the over the top drama from the last 20 minutes, when big secrets are revealed and serious decisions are taken in the middle of violent murders and experiments from a mad scientist. In summary, a film which is difficult to classify, but easy to appreciate because of the enthusiasm and dedication with which it was made. And then, we have solid performances from most of the cast, starting by Sharni Vinson, who had left me astonished as the "final girl" from You're Next. In Patrick: Evil Awakens, she brings another credible and enthusiastic work. Charles Dance brings a perfect performance as the twisted genius, giving him a subtext of emotional instability which makes him more frightening than any prosaic villain who is motivated by his mere evilness. The only weak spot of the cast is Damon Gameau, who feels a bit insipid and listless as the gallant. Another negative element is the implementation of a few totally digital scenes which feel a bit out of place in a film which is so respectful of the '70s aesthetic. Nevertheless, I found Patrick: Evil Awakens a very competent remake, and I enjoyed it pretty much, so I consider it worthy of a recommendation.

Why do studios except to make movies like this? Patrick is nothing but a bunch of poorly acted. Poorly produced muck with no real storyline and a few cheap jump scares. Patrick totally wasted the potential of a good film set in a creepy near abandoned clinic were strange doctors undertaken strange procedures. No part of this wretch inducing story makes any sense at all and it is lucky it wasn't too long a movie because I would not be able to stomach another minute of this garbage. Sharnie Vincent Is a horrible actress but i think she tries her best but she is not well suited for this particular genre. The story contains a ridiculous amount of holes. And rubbish that is impossible to happen in real life and even in a movie they are still ridiculous. A bunch of near dead parents chanting something Patrick desires? Really?