I admit that I came to this remake with a bit of bias. The 1976 classic is one of my all-time favorite films. It was more of a psychological thriller than a horror film. This remake has some impressive photography and I did like the added scenes taking place at the Vatican. However, I felt that the original Damien was more effective as an innocent child who didn't fully understand the evil he possessed. In the scene in which Gregory Peck was about to kill him on the altar, one could understand how Robert Thorn could have doubts when Damien looked up at him and pleaded, "Don't Daddy."

This kid was so blatantly evil, it should have been a no-brainer!

And...I hesitate to bring this up, since I've made some mistakes in my own work, but...who was the fact-checker on this film, anyway? When Thorn is told to go to the city of Megiddo, he's told it's "south of Jerusalem."
Nobody on this film had GPS, or at least a map? Megiddo is NORTHWEST of Jerusalem, south of Nazareth!

In standard Hollywood fashion, this remake of the Gregory Peck classic thinks it's making things better by making things more extreme. So here, hellish dogs in a cemetery don't just threaten and terrify, they physically lock on to Liev Schrieber. That's the pattern throughout -- ratchet things up, hope for the best, or the worst in this case. The air of foreboding and menace in the original is traded here for thin thrills, more gore.

The movie suffers further from a poor cast poorly directed. Schrieber, Stiles, and Farrow have done good stuff. Here, all seem wooden, emotionless, cardboard cutouts. Stiles is utterly devoid of presence. Schrieber (39, and the best of the lot, but too young to plausibly be ambassador) and Stiles (25 at release) are both too young for their roles. This is the kind of casting decision that's made solely for marketing.

Schrieber is an excellent actor, though he doesn't have the sheer force of presence that Gregory Peck brought to every role. The character of Katherine Thorn has been considerably expanded, but Stiles is no Lee Remick.

Mia Farrow is the worst of all -- truly terrible -- the worst I've personally seen her. And of all the characters, she fares worst in comparison to the original -- Billie Whitelaw as Mrs. Baylock in '76. Whitelaw conveyed such an air of pure malevolence. I can imagine Farrow cringing as she took direction.

I haven't seen such a ruination of a classic as this one because of bad casting - an absolutely abominable choice of high-end actors to play the story. Sorry but Julia Stiles is too butch and too cool to play a part that was played by Lee Remick who gave the character of Kathy class and likeability. Leiv Schreiber, who I love, was also not for this movie. He's too cool. Maybe better choices would have been George Clooney and Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Mia Farrow as Mrs. Balock just didn't work. She's too delicate and doesn't look like a demon. The boy who plays Damien is awful. He's non-descript except to say that his acting is bad. He looked at the camera a few times and when he was supposed to look menacing, he either looked like he was sulking or looked like a kid just play acting. In the scene in the car, he just didn't rough up his mom like a wild little animal like the original Damien. And let's face it, you can't compare this child to the little boy in the original Damien. Little Harvey Stevens had that little smirk that was beautiful AND creepy.

On the plus side, the added scenes which were not in the original movie were very good, such as the creepy images that come to their minds and especially the gut wrenching scene in Mrs. Thorn's hospital room when she's visited by Mrs. Balock. Very creepy and very sad. So, I thought it was good but it could've been much better with the right cast.