Director(s): Steve Beck
Available Quality: Hi Def
Country: USA, Canada
Available Quality: DivX, Hi Def, iPod, Hi Def, Hi Def
IMDB Rating: 5.2 out of 10 (31291 votes)
Arthur and his two children, Kathy and Bobby, inherit his Uncle Cyruss estate a glass house that serves as a prison to 12 ghosts. When the family, accompanied by Bobbys Nanny and an attorney, enter the house they find themselves trapped inside an evil machine designed by the devil and powered by the dead to open the Eye of Hell. Aided by Dennis, a ghost hunter, and his rival Kalina, a ghost rights activist out to set the ghosts free, the group must do what they can to get out of the house alive.
|Thir13en Ghosts (iPod)||Resolution: 480x272 px||Total Size: 280 Mb||
|Thir13en Ghosts (Hi Def)||Resolution: 852x464 px||Total Size: 631 Mb||
|Thir13en Ghosts (Hi Def)||Resolution: 1920x1040 px||Total Size: 8125 Mb|
|Thir13en Ghosts (Hi Def)||Resolution: 1280x688 px||Total Size: 4475 Mb|
|Thir13en Ghosts (DivX)||Resolution: 640x352 px||Total Size: 706 Mb|
sharron albert (16 May 2013)
I probably would have avoided this after seeing the trailers on HBO. I likemy ghost stories 'pure' rather than the result of some mechanical means (therecent remake of Shirley Jackson's The House comes to mind). But I noticedthat Tony Shalhoub was in it, and having become a fan of his Mr. Monk serieson USA, I thought I'd give it a try. His low-key performance was the bestthing about the film. The occult elements were ho-hum; the ghosts were uglybut not scary. F. Murray Abraham was wasted as the evil uncle, who sets uphis nephew and his children. And one of the biggest missing plot elements isjust exactly was the goal of the uncle and what would have happened if hesucceeded in activating the machine? It's kind of hard to get invested in anoutcome if you don't know the stakes. The special effects are fine, but I'donly recommend it to those who must see all B films of this ilk, orcompletist fans of Tony Shalhoub.
Rob Stackley (15 May 2013)
This was one of the coolest movies ever. It wasn't scary, it wasn'tsuspenseful, it was just cool. And totally fun to watch. The specialeffects were great without looking "special", the house totally rocked, andthe gore was right on target.After "Amadeus", I usually regard anything F. Murray Abraham does as awaste of his infinite talent, but I found "Thirt13en Ghosts" worthy of eventhe great one.Shannon Elizabeth was adequate, and certainly not as sensational asshethinks she is, (check out her web-site for a glimpse into the sordid worldof this mirror-hugger) and the rest of the cast was fine, but really onlyplayed as scenery to the real star of the film, The House.See this film. It's fun, it's quick, it moves. It's like going toDisneyland in Hell without leaving your house.
(14 May 2013)
This movie is not all that bad. Better than Castle's old boring one from the 60's.There is some creepiness to the movie,and some twisted history as well! Each ghosts has a story that if you do some research is true! Like Jackel,in the 1800's in England was a crazed man named "Caged Jakel".This movie also twists the whole astrology and 13 signs movement.What I also didn't like was Rah Diggas sterotypical role of a nanny to a poor white family.The gore is excellent with blood and guts gallore! And the house or should I save "living astrochart/glass maze",was just amazing.The acting was standdard,and at times too characterized,and the ghosts needed more plot. Like another poster stated "the history of the ghosts is scary than the movie itself".Since Holloween is near,why not spin this DVD at a party along with THE RING?Ghoulish fun for all!
(14 May 2013)
First of all, I have to say that luckily I bought a used copy of this movie and had the option to return it to where I purchased it. This was a terrible movie from beginning to end. The ghosts were really cool looking, and so wasn't the house. Those were pretty much the only cool things about the flick. There was so much info about the ghosts and the people packed into an hour and a half that your mind just gets all mixed up. The only good thing about the DVD that saves it from getting no stars is that there is a special feature that gives details on each and every ghost. Other than that, this movie was a total flop. Get Ghost Ship or The Ring instead.
Staci Layne Wilson (11 May 2013)
If you're old enough, or if you're just a sucker for the horror genre,you'll remember the William Castle shlockfest, 13 Ghosts, whichwas released in 1960. It's a fun movie, but only mediocre -- and it'ssaid that those kind of movies are the best to remake. After all, whyre-do something if you cannot improve upon it?I'm happy to report that 2001's 13 Ghosts is indeed animprovement over the original. The plot has been looselypreserved -- an eccentric ghost-hunting uncle bequeaths hauntedhouse to poor relatives -- but mostly this is a stylish, spookyspecial-effects extravaganza. Unlike the gangly ghost-ganderinggoggles of the original, the new glasses are pretty plain -- but theimportant thing is what's seen through the lenses. The ghosts arejust about the freakiest, scariest, most way-out creatures to comerattling down the hallway in a long time. Since there are twelve ofthem (who's the thirteenth ghost? As in the original, that's amystery till the end), there's a special nightmare for everyone. TheTorn Prince, The Torso, and The Jackal, to name just a few. Thehouse is vastly improved as well -- it's a much scarier see-throughstructure than the one used in this year's wannabe thriller, "TheGlass House."Trapped in their new home by shifting walls and churning floorlevels, the family (Dad Tony Shaloub, daughter Shannon Elizabeth,and son Alec Roberts) encounters evil entities that want toeradicate anyone in their path -- and unlike traditional ghosts,these ones can (and will) do bodily harm! Aside from the family,their housekeeper and two other people end up trapped inside themalevolent structure. One is Rafkin (Matthew Lillard), formerassistant to the aforementioned eccentric uncle (F. MurrayAbraham) -- I've always liked Lillard, but he didn't work for me here.He's too funny, and I think that 13 Ghosts would have workedmuch better as a straight-ahead scary movie. (And there isn't quiteenough comedy in it to make a comedic horror film, like AnAmerican Werewolf in London, or even Scream.)Steve Beck, who is making his directorial debut here, is nostranger to the film industry. He served as visual effects art directoron such films as The Hunt for Red October, The Abyss, andIndiana Jones and the Last Crusade. He definitely knows how tokeep our eyes trained on the screen. Everything comes togetherreally well and compliments each other (the music score andsound effects overlap and entwine, following the action on thescreen perfectly).I'm not saying that 13 Ghosts is the best supernatural horror film ofthe year (that honor would have to go to The Others, with JeepersCreepers on its heels), but it's a fun way to "kill" an hour and halfthis Halloween season.
z_tamuri (11 May 2013)
Wow, this movie just wasted 300 minutes of my life ... what? it was only90minutes long?! Seemed much longer ... !!The acting was dire, the story is just a re-run of practically everyhorrormovie in history. The scary scenes arent scary - the twists aren'ttwists -well except for one (thats why I gave it 1 and not 0). But most of all theacting was soooo rubbish.It seems that most producers nowadays deem that if you put a fair amountof'super' special effects into a movie, then your guaranteed a winner. Wellitaint so! Time for them to wake up - horror movies need to improve. I meanfor God's sake hire people who can act at least!!And the special effects weren't even that super!Lastly, I aint being harsh - its very very rare that I dont like a movie -its this movie and Scary Movie only that I have thought were a load of oldtrollop (rubbish).1 out of 10
(10 May 2013)
Thir13en Ghosts (2001) is a modern stylized remake of the 1960 version. The film stars Tony Shalhoub, Shannon Elizabeth, Mathew Lillard, F. Murray Abrham, Kathryn Anderson, and J.R. Bourne. Arthur Kriticos (Shalhoub) and his family unexpectingly inherit an all glass home. It appears to be thier dream house until they discover whats in the basement. Ghosts. The ghosts start escaping from their containment spells room one by one. That is when all the excitement starts to begin. Thir13en Ghosts isn't a bad movie. It uses a different style of horror (example- the house is all glass and elegant instead of the traditional old messy house on a hill....) I also like the idea of these ghosts and how they differ in appearance and how they attack the unsuspecting victims. The storyline does get confusing at times, but still keeps you at the edge of your seat. I recommend this film to horror fans.
(10 May 2013)
1. Scare factor -- None.2. Visual effects -- Nicely done, but fairly typical for Hollywood films.3. The house -- It's really a "machine" but still pretty cool. Nice concept.4. The plot -- Dumb. 5. The acting -- Workmanlike. Not bad, not great. Just OK. It wouldn't be a "horror" film if some of the actors didn't overact.6. The dialog -- What you would expect for the (cheesy) remake of an old horror film. I can't believe F. Murray Abraham signed on to do this movie.7. The ghosts -- Interesting and gory but not scary. See scare factor.8. Matthew Lillard -- Annoying.9. DVD extas -- Solid. If you care for the movie at all, one DVD extra feature gives the background for the ghosts. 10. The Angry Princess -- Gratuitous nudity. 11. Better than the original? -- I have not yet seen the original, but this version makes me curious about William Castle's 1960 "classic," which was originally shown in 3D.12. Good movie for Halloween? -- No. See scare factor.13. Rent, don't buy -- If you're inclined to see it, rent it. It's not worth buying. You'll probably only watch it once.
george.schmidt (09 May 2013)
13 GHOSTS (2001) ** Tony Shalhoub, Shannon Elizabeth, Matthew Lillard,Embeth Davidtz, Rah Digga, Alec Roberts, F. Murray Abraham, JR Bourne. Special effects laden remake of the 1960 William Castle cult classic aboutan inherited haunted house with the titular spectres gets a facelift withstate-of-the-art visuals and an impressive production design (SeanHargreaves) that outshine this otherwise tedious scare-free horror flick(the second of cult horror classic facelifts produced by Richard Zemeckis,Joel Silver and Gilbert Adler, the guys responsible for resurrecting "TalesFrom The Crypt" as a successful HBO series) with Shalhoub and his family inperil after being willed a glass house/machine driven entity with angryghosts seeking vengeance. Some cool graphic offings (i.e. someone isefficiently sliced in half vertically) can't make up for a weak storylineand bad acting (Elizabeth is reduced to a lot of airheaded mugging). (Dir:Steve Beck)
Clive McGraw (09 May 2013)
I remembered this being way better then it was. Not that I rememberedthat it was a GREAT film. But a good, entertaining popcorn flick. Mymemory must be worse then I thought.The first thing that struck me was that the picture quality made itlook like a TV movie, the intro was horrible, the little plot revealswere done in an amateurish way the way the scenes were shot made itseem clunky and cheap. This stayed true for the rest of the film.When it introduces the main family, the 'imperfectness' of them wasdone in a lame way. I didn't care ONE bit about any of them. When theywere driving to the house, there was a shot where the car was leavingthe city on a bridge, heading across the screen in one direction, thenwhen it cut to another road with them driving past, it was going theopposite direction. Just straight forward BAD directing.In fact the only two things that were good about the movie were thehouse...even though it really could've been better, plus it wasn't shotvery well and the lawyers death was pretty damn cool, especially howhis tie falls off first.I remembered the ghosts being great. But they sucked, only the fatghost was creepy, because of his mum taking him around mostly. None ofthem were used effectively though.Total waste of what could've been some good mindless fun.I must watch the original.2/10(reviewed after third-ish viewing (must've seen it at least a couple oftimes many years ago))
(06 May 2013)
What can I say besides this movie is average AT BEST. Yes, the ghosts look cool but its all downhill from there. The acting is horrendous, except for Tony Shalhoub who gives a typically strong performance. The scares are virtually non-existant save for a few jolts only caused by sudden loud bangs following silence. The story is a corny haunted house-inhabited by ghosts one, upgraded technologically. If you're looking for a good horror movie, look elsewhere. If you're looking for a scary movie, also look elsewhere. If you have you're heart set on a haunted house movie, go with the original (1963) The Haunting or The Changeling (1980). But if you must have a recent one, 1999's House on Haunted Hill is superior to Thirteen Ghosts.
(05 May 2013)
DVD arrived in time for us to watch it for Halloween. Was in good condition. Everything went smoothly.
Boba_Fett1138 (04 May 2013)
Just don't set you expectations for this movie too high or else you'llend up disappointed. "Thir13en Ghosts" is not a new "Aliens","Nightmare on Elm Street" or "Halloween", but nevertheless the movie isentertaining and good in it's very own way.The movie tries very hard to created an "Aliens" like atmosphere but itnever even comes close to it. It never becomes really scary and itlacks tension.The acting is OK and the characters are fine with the exception of afew needless characters that just don't add enough to the story. Someof the plot twists are pointless and the movie lacks a good final.The make-up however is fantastic, especially for the 13 ghosts. Thespecial effects are nice too and only used when really needed which isa positive thing. The movie has a good quick pace and some nicecamera-work.The concept is good: A man and his family are trapped in a glass housewith ghosts in it. However the execution of it could and should havebeen better.But nevertheless it's a entertaining movie and well worth the 90minutes of your time. Like I said before: Just don't set youexpectations too high.6/10
Christopher C. Courter (03 May 2013)
MAJOR SPOILERS....DON'T READ UNLESS YOU WANT TO KNOW !!!I normally don't see "horror flicks" in a theater setting. I find thisgenre of film seems to attract a generally rude audience. The talking,wisecracking, seat moving, and snack throwing crowds at "teen" horrorflicksdrive me nuts. This activity is usually a sign that the movie is a goodoneand that everyone is having a great time.In the case of "13 Ghosts" there was a surprising amount of inactivity andpeople saying things like "come on" and "give me a break!" Even theyoungest children in the theater seemed quite disappointed. After someserious discussion with my wife, we chalked-up the whole problem to thelackof logic in the film.SPOILERS START HERE...Beginning with the film's very tag line, "13 Ghosts, terror ismultiplying,"we begin to see problems. 13 is a prime number. You can't multiplyanything to get it!The film establishes certain "rules" about the chambers that hold theghosts. The first is that the glass is absolutely "sound proof" and thesecond is that it is "unbreakable." Well, there is a scene where acharacter yells directions to another trapped inside one of the "soundproof" glass cells. Later, every piece of glass in the houseshatters.Another concept in this film is that the "living" had to wear specialglasses that enable them to see ghosts. This is true throughout most ofthefilm however; this rule does not apply in the last 5 minutes.As for the ghosts themselves, they were more like cartoons of ghosts than"real" ghosts. They reminded me of the ghosts in Ghostbusters 2. Theywereso strange and overly distorted that I couldn't buy-in to the fact thattheywere once living.Black people should be offended by the character of Maggie played by RahDigga. She was portrayed as a stereotypical, wise cracking, moneyobsessed,lazy black maid. They even went as far as showing her doing some DJ recordscratching (tape on a reel actually) as if all blacks, given theopportunity, would do so.F. Murray Abraham needs to reassess his agent's choices and Tony Shalhoub'stalents are generally wasted here. As for Rah Digga, well, she needs torent Spike Lee's Bamboozled and get a clue.
catheadcatheadcathead (01 May 2013)
First, let me say that I am a huge fan of William Castle and, inparticular,of the original "13 Ghosts". In fact I have two VHS copies of it & willbuyit on DVD someday. Yes, it's not a very good film, but it's got... Idon'tknow... a certain quality which I find charming. It's a movie I rememberfirst watching late night on TV probably in the late 60's on Big Chuck andHoolihan.OK, that being said, I was just hoping that this remake wouldn't be toobad-maybe something along the lines of "The House on Haunted Hill" which,whilenot great, kept my interest until its goofy ending.ANYHOO, I looked at my wife about 60 minutes into the remake of "13" andsaid "this is horrible". She just nodded mutely. I figured there was nomore than 30 minutes left so I stuck it out till the end. Hoping, justhoping, for one redeeming reference or homage or ANYTHING that wasn'tfreaking STUPID.Loud, moronic, and uninteresting is my three word description for thisatrocity. I had real bad misgivings right from the get-go with that loud,moronic, uninteresting scene in the junkyard.Why did they change the last name of the family from "Zorba"? Why didtheyremove the mother and add the housekeeper (and as someone else alreadycommented- how could they afford her)? Why was there not at least a nodtothe original film? Why am I spending this time and effort on a piece ofcrap film?So very disappointing. I doubt "Dark Castle" films is going to fool meintoseeing one of their "remakes" again.BTW, I think Tony Shaloub's best work is in "Barton Fink". I thought hewasexcellent in his (too short) role as a harried producer.
lthseldy1 (01 May 2013)
This movie has borrowed so many pieces from movies such as "Carrie", "TheShineing" "The Cell" and many others that you might pick out as you watch. Why can't movies be original anymore? Ok, this movie was a bit intense withthe way the ghosts looked and moved although some of the way these ghostslook may have been too overdone and the madeup to be "too" scary that theyjust looked rediculas like the guy with nails in his head and the littleboy. There were parts in the movie that were gross like what happened tothe lawyer but that part was taken from "The Cell" so it can't be tooriginal. The characters in this movie were all to lame. The stepmotherwas terrible in this movie, she should have been gone from the beginning. And that "electrician" goofy Jim Carrey acting guy was just as awful. Idon't know how they ended up in this movie much less the way they played outtheir roles. This movie is good for a watch but only onewatch.
Jelena Nikolic (24 April 2013)
In the beginning,I have to say that I didn't like this movie toomuch.It has good idea,but the work is very bad.Firstly of all,number13...why it's so special?Everyone who mentions that number says it'sbad luck and that sort of thing.The other things - ghosts.I don't thinkI should talk you about ghosts now,but they have some figurativemeaning which is very stupid.And when you pack number 13 and ghostsinto one box,you get something very bad.In this case,it's a movie.Isaid,the idea is very good - the house is perfect,Latin spells are veryinteresting detail...But,something's missing!The actingis...HM...awful?I didn't like the actors,but thanks God on Rah Digga,Iwatched the movie until the end only because she's got a role in it.Idon't know...I didn't like the eyeglasses because that is the moststupid detail in whole movie.I have just waiting for the moment whensome guy's going to put his glasses,look at some girl and tellher:''Oh,my God,I can see you naked!'' Rubbish! So...i give this movie5 out of 10,although it doesn't deserves it.
Matt..377 (24 April 2013)
This festering pile keeps in tradition with horrible horror remakes such asHOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL and THE HAUNTING. A scant plot about a mansion fullof violent ghosts is blown through the roof courtesy of about 150 milliondollars worth of overelaborate special effects, many of which are all tooobviously computer generated.Film tries like hell to be scary, with hard-rocking sound effects and flashycamerawork emphasizing the ghosts' movements, yet fails to generate even ashiver. THE OTHERS was much, much less elaborate, yet managed to chill andscare better than this wannabe frightfest ever could.*1/2 out of ****. Will somebody please tell Hollywood to leave our classichorror movies alone!
(23 April 2013)
Apparently I'm the only one who decided to watch this movie based on nothing but good reviews from a few friends and family members. Yes, this movie is nothing special but there are few positives that make this film worthy of 3 stars.So what's this movie about? Basically, a family moves into a "haunted" house after the mother dies in a horrible accident. This house is rather unique in that it's made up of mostly glass and there are Latin inscriptions everywhere. Eventually, the family learns that the house is of course haunted and it holds a few more rather creepy secrets.Let's go over the positives first. I have to say that the setup of the house is rather interesting. The idea of glass being the only defense from the ghosts is a tad bit terrifying from the characters' point of view. Second, although some may beg to differ, I thought the different ghosts were the best part of the movie. Not only are they creepy looking, but the story behind how each of them died is creepy as well. Lastly, the first half of the movie is not that bad in terms of keeping your eyes glued to the screen. To completely write this movie off as being awful would be wrong if I didn't mention these positives. And let's talk about the negatives. First, the acting is simply not all that good. There are a couple of famous actors/actresses in this film you may recognize including Shannon Elizabeth, Tony Shalhoub, and Matthew Lillard. Although Shalhoub is not awful, Elizabeth and Lillard are borderline annoying. Second, other reviewers have pointed out the bad storyline and I have to agree. Apart from the whole haunted house bit being predictable, the supposed climax/a-ha! part of the movie had me thinking "That's it?" Without giving away any spoilers, I'll say the reason behind the ghosts being in the house is rather boring.The bottom line is that although there are thrilling scenes in the movie, the climax killed what could have been a good movie. If I could have, I would have given this film 2.5 stars rather than 3.
aramo1 (23 April 2013)
Based on R1 DVD 91 minCan you have too many kool effects .. this movie proves you certainly can.While it has it's moments, the glass house and all the gadgets within arecertainly impressive to types who are impressed by gadgets, the directorfails to convey either the meaning of the story or any of the horror.Everything is lost in annoying flash edits and unexplained flash forwards.Oh there is a lot of running around in narrow corridors as well - never tookeen on that.5/10 catch it on TV
Review total: 20, showing from 1 to 20