not as good as all the hype

Dreadfully Boring

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

I loved the original "Night Stalker" TV series. It played on TV when i was a kid and succeeded in scaring me silly a few times. The female vampire episode gave me nightmares! I was excited when I heard they were "updating" it and I like Stuart Townsend. However they went ahead and changed EVERYTHING that made the original so good.First off--Townsend is a good actor but he's way too young for the role. Darren McGavin was older and much better. Also this crap about his wife being killed by monsters (or something) was pointless. The house he lived in was beautiful but WAY too expensive for a reporter and totally out of place in this context. His two "helpers" were just annoying. The original Kolchak worked alone. The original series also sometimes didn't give you a good clear look at the monsters. I realize this was probably for budget constraints but it worked in the series favor. The glimpses you got were far more scary then shoving it in your face. This redo ignores that and gives us too-perfect monsters and such which you see clearly.This was a redo where everything was changed far too much. I stopped watching after episode 3. Not worth looking for (although I doubt that it's ever going to pop up on TV again). Stick with the original.

Wow! I am hopeful that the producers and directors of this remake take a moment to see all of the reviews written about this show. I never thought that this show would have such a large viewer ship. Did anyone notice the digital cameo of Carl Kolchek (Darren McGavin) standing in front of the desk in the pilot? There will never be another Darren McGavin, and CK will never be portrayed the way McGavin saw the character. He fit the part for that time (74-75). He fit our 'idea' of the cliché reporter. Let's face it; 'A Christmas Story' (1983) has solidified DM as a household name for future generations (my kids just watched this past Christmas all day). I think we will all miss him.I purchased the DVD of 'Kolchek: The Night Stalker' complete series, (all 20 episodes) as my wife had never seen the original, only this remake. Having nothing to compare this version to, she liked it and looked forward to it each week. She liked the old version too, but I have to admit, the suspense was not the same for me as it was when I was 8. (I had to sneak to watch the original).I think some of the reviews have been far to critical. There is oftentimes an expectation that a remake will be exactly like the original. Not unlike viewers who tuned in to see Star Trek: TNG. I have come to expect similarities between the new and old version but I do not expect a clone. I want to see a unique and different version of the original. I am nostalgic, but I have always had the 'I wonder what a version made today would be like?' with regard to all of my old shows.Yes, the name is similar, no the drama is not the same. When one considers the success of 'Scooby' gang sci-fi (Buffy, Angel, etc.) it makes sense that this show would take on a similar approach.How about Battlestar Galactica? They have the same name, but they are not the same sci-fi drama. I've come to expect a similar story line in remakes but not exact, mostly updated.I think this show is a 7, better than average, nicely updated to fit today's audience but not the best it can/could be. It could be refined/polished.

It hooked me. I had to watch more and when I did, I was glad I did. I confess that the first time I watched, it was purely out of curiosity. Having grown up with the original show, I could not resist the nostalgic draw of hearing it was back and seeing what they had done with it. I just had to see it. I was one of the few that appreciated the homage to the original character by having him digitally inserted into the show at one point and even felt a bit of pride that they went to such trouble to do so. I found myself liking the show because of such things almost instantly.I then was impressed by the show on its own merit very quickly. It departed from the original format without question, but made very clear it was worthy of watching. Not only was it interesting and had the classic "neat spooky stuff", but it had plot twists and storyline that kept you watching. It also had enough intelligence in the writing that you didn't feel like it was campy and childish. In a time when shows like CSI are top billing, this kind of show was ranking right up there with writing that was suspenseful and well thought out. It kept you guessing. In this day, when an audience can say, "Wow, I didn't see that one coming," you know you have done well.Studio executives don't want to hear this kind of praise though. It is nice, but it doesn't pad the bottom line. Fine, here is something for their pockets to listen to then: Right now people are hungry for being scared. They want things that are spooky and go bump in the night. We watch movies like SAW 5 and Texas Chainsaw Massacre 7 and have a morbid fascination with CSI shows like there is no stopping us. You have a your foot in the door with a sure thing here. The old name got you in the door, so don't let this go. Make it better than ever. Figure out where to take it with the writers for another couple of seasons and run with it and you'll make tons of cash. People want this. Scare them and not in a Buffy kind of way. Supernatural is going there too, but in a different way. You have an almost X-files approach here and you should exploit it to the fullest. People want to be scared and have a fixation on death and love being afraid. They also need to know that there are some people out there who are just as afraid as the rest of us, but still are willing to risk it all to save the world, so bring on the dark heroes. You have Dirty Harry with a camera and a pen chasing monsters and half of the ghosts are in his own closet. This is good stuff and as close as you can expect to get to the flavor of the original without feeling like it is a rip-off. The only thing you risk is writer burn out as they continue to reach for bigger and better things each week, but since when did that ever stop a series? You should be good for at least another season or two and by then maybe even a movie or two. Come on, think big and go for the money while spoiling us with what we want...more Night Stalker.

I just recently watched the box set and enjoyed it very much. If you approach it from the angle that this is a different show(but with the same name as the old show-which I enjoyed)you can enjoy it on it's own merits. There was some unexplained and "huh?" type stuff going on, but getting canceled after 6 episodes will do that. I liked the leads, and there were spots of humor in the show(as dark as it was)if you were paying attention. Network TV is inane simply for the fact that they don't give us viewers a chance to get into shows anymore...remember when a show came on every week at the same time and was there for at least a year(even if it sucked)? I had no clue this show had been canceled until I saw the box set of the "complete series"...heck, I never even got a chance to watch it on the telly. Oh well, enough railing against the system...a nice little show that could have been something if given a chance.