0
i bet they were.
um, the only thing i've ever found julia stiles to be competent in is the Bourne Identity movies. she is not very capable of doing subtle - she can only do extremes (very happy, very sad, very scared, very angry, etc). when i saw the first, shorter, less give-away trailer, i was happy to see liev schrieber (always had a little thing for him) and she didn't look so bad as a mom.
what i liked about the marketing for this is that it was smart. it was minimal. remember The Matrix? they gave cryptic, minimal trailers, then it hit us like a hot ton of bricks and we were enthralled.
alas, the omen sold out and gave us way too much info in the trailers right before the release.
i'll get around to writing a review but for now I shall say that liev schrieber seemed practically dead and emotionless, julia stiles is too young - acting and experience-wise - to play the character she did - and the boy literally had about 6 lines in the movie and had a very crappy end scene. that poster someone put of him holding a hand and looking back? yeah, immediately at the end of that look he SMILES.
THIS ISN't SUPPOSED TO BE CHUCKY PEOPLE! GET WITH IT!
argh. the movie was not scary, had a silly/pathetic plotline with "the signs" and their interpretation, was messy and more focused on dramatic imagery than marrying plot to ambiance (ie, it was more focused on showing Julie Stiles in red in a pale room, all haunted and striking).
total waste of time.
__________________
life without movies is like cereal without milk. possible, but disgusting. but not nearly as bad as cereal with water. don't lie. I know you've done it.