I like Black Panther, but I didn't like this movie.

Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

I hate remakes. The only remake I've ever decided was better than the original was John Carpenter's Village of the Damned. With The Bad Seed, I first read the play in the seventh grade and downloaded the film soon afterwards, and was shocked by Patty McCormack's haunting performance as Rhoda Penmark, an eight-year-old child who is a perfect angel but has a secret urge to kill within her mind. It was filmed in 1956 and was in black and white.With this more modern version, Rhoda's name has been changed to Racheal and the acting was terrible. The soundtrack was boring, and Racheal was just a spoiled crybaby and wasn't very convincing at all.I know it's not always fair to compare and contrast with movies and their remakes, but I think if the acting had been better this could have been very successful. Unfortunately it'll just never beat the original, which might not be a bad thing because I love the original all on its own.

This is a remake that should have never been made. The original IS original! And the acting is superb. This horrible remake is very choppy and some of the scenes seem to be "fillers" and leave little room for the mystery of the story. The acting is robotic. The talents of Blair Brown, Lynn Redgrave, Richard Kiley, and Keith Carradine are wasted here. The "bad" girl is very stereotypical and not at all believable. Even the dialogue does not seem genuine--people do not talk like that. Unlike the original,nothing seems to be shocking as each new plot twist is revealed. It seems you can always tell what is coming next. Skip this stinker and stick to the original!

I found this movie a lot more enjoyable than the 1950s version. Where patty McCormick is known for the original, she is nowhere as good as the star of this version. Where this was a made for television movie, I enjoyed it much more than the original movie version. I have seen it a couple of times and look for it whenever it comes on television. I cant wait until it comes out on DVD. I would gladly pay top dollar for it. one of the few movies I have seen I would do this for. It is refreshing to see the girl as a bratty girl who is evil, instead of the usual devil spawn. Makes you realize what can be out there in the real world. I think many of us in our lives have seen kids who borderline on this girls personality. I think many of us can look at this girl and wonder if the brats we know out there could be just as evil. This alone makes the movie suspenseful if not scary.

In a disturbing trend that continues to this day, a classic film was remade into a distorted and less-involving TV version. Memorable, sometimes legendary films (like "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?", "Notorious", "Indiscreet", "Night of the Hunter", "I Saw What You Did" to name just a few...) get updated for a new audience and inevitably lose something in the translation. Here is a potentially strong remake that goes awry mainly do to casting, but also due to script revisions that drain a lot of the emotion out of the story. For unknown reasons, the father has been eliminated from the story and a key role (which won Eileen Heckart and Oscar nod in the original) is shaved down and treated as a throwaway. The story concerns Brown (in a solid enough performance) whose preteen daughter (Wells) is increasingly suspected of wrongdoings at school and around her home. Wells is adored by her grandfather Kiley and neighbor Redgrave and loathed by the booze-soaked handyman Carradine. Soon, Brown starts to believe that she herself is indirectly responsible for some of the acts that have been perpetrated. The biggest problem with this movie is Wells. She is a weak actress and an expressionless prop through much of the story. Also, she lacks the primary thing that the character needs to begin with! She isn't in any way cute or adorable!!! The child should appear as an idealized, beautiful creature. Wells is not in this category. (Although the world can breathe a sigh of relief that Tori Spelling wasn't put in it!) Appearance aside, she just doesn't have the chops to pull the role off. Her presence hampers Brown, who actually could have done pretty well otherwise (despite some really unflattering pants.) Redgrave tries desperately to inject some energy into this rather dull affair, but unfortunately comes off as ridiculous much of the time. Decked out in a series of horrific '80's workout ensembles and headgears, she is a far cry from the original character who was more of a surrogate mother figure. Carradine is so-so. He is so obviously "acting" and occasionally looks as if he can't remember his lines as he tries to portray someone "slow". It's a lazy portrayal, one that SCREAMS for a Geoffrey Lewis-type. (Where was HE?) Kiley comes off well, but he has no chance of saving it and Haney (always enjoyably crusty) scores as the prim school administrator. This is worthwhile only as a demonstration of how great movies should be left alone or only to see a shrimpy, almost malformed, meek Allen get bullied by a girl.