Metascore
33 out of 100

Generally unfavorable - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 23
  2. Negative: 11 out of 23
  1. Reviewed by: Roger Moore
    63
    Sinks or swims with the actors. Gallner makes a very convincing boy-about-to-die; Madsen is his properly stricken mom; and Donovan, an under-used leading man, plays the stressed, guilt-ridden dad well.
  2. Reviewed by: John DeFore
    60
    Haunting tweaks familiar tropes enough to make them interesting. Just not so interesting as to inspire many nightmares after the credits roll.
  3. Don't misunderstand: the proceedings are pretty silly, and the scares were a lot fresher back in 1979, when we first saw "The Amityville Horror." But Cornwell and his cast take things just seriously enough to keep us at least intermittently on edge.
  4. 50
    A technically proficient horror movie and well acted.
  5. The movie bumps along from low-grade scare to scare, and it's not lousy, mainly because Virginia Madsen prevents it from being so.
  6. Reviewed by: Tirdad Derakhshani
    50
    A tepid PG-13 iteration of the already lame 1979 genre classic "The Amityville Horror."
  7. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    50
    Although it's reasonably well-acted and offers a few certifiable jolts, feels awfully familiar.
  8. 50
    You have to be willing to take a lot of punishment for a few good scares.
  9. Reviewed by: Joe Leydon
    50
    Long on atmosphere yet short on dramatic tension.
  10. Reviewed by: Adam Markovitz
    42
    Smart enough to put much of its weight on Gallner, a lively presence with a terrifically sour mug that makes him look like a mutual cousin of Willem Dafoe and Peter Lorre.
  11. Reviewed by: Mark Olsen
    40
    Part of what makes "Connecticut" oddly watchable even as it drags is the oil-and-water mix of acting styles of the leads. Virginia Madsen's refined naturalism is an awkward fit with the sharp mannerisms of Martin Donovan.
  12. It loses steam once the wraiths become fully visible: they're just not scary enough.
  13. Reviewed by: Jason Buchanan
    38
    A film that pays lip service to some interesting ideas, but is far too concerned with pleasing a large crowd to be anything more than another instantly forgettable fright flick.
  14. 38
    Boring and uninspired, this movie gives ghost stories a bad name.
  15. 33
    As a piece of storytelling, The Haunting In Connecticut is pretty lazy. As a horror movie, it's lazier still, bringing out every annoying shock-cut and disorienting sound-design trick of the last decade.
  16. Reviewed by: Scott Foundas
    30
    In the realm of domestic horror, The Haunting in Connecticut is about as scary as a shower that suddenly changes temperature when someone flushes the toilet.
  17. Gives you the creeps, the giggles and the groans in almost equal measure.
  18. Contains so many insults to the audience's intelligence.
  19. 25
    There is still a great horror movie about foreclosure to be made. In the meantime, this movie plays games. (How many rounds of hide-and-seek should an audience tolerate?)
  20. Reviewed by: Rob Calvert
    25
    When the hits finally do come, they are really only capable of scaring 13-year-olds making their first trip into the horror genre.
  21. C'mon, in matters of haunted-house inhabitation, settling into an ex-mortuary is like renting above a dentist's office -- ashen faces and ghastly screams come with the territory.
  22. 11
    Koteas' overearnest performance almost makes The Haunting in Connecticut worth a look, but ultimately even the star of Cronenberg's "Crash" can't salvage what is essentially a substandard rip-off of "The Amityville Horror."
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 39 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 21
  2. Negative: 6 out of 21
  1. I admit, this was a really good movie. I did jump and scream a few times. It does deliver thrills, chills and scares. I'd definitely recommend this movie. Full Review »
  2. This is a pretty standard jump scare haunted house movie. The acting isn't horrible but it's nothing to write home about. The movie plays up the based on the true story angle but if you watch the special features on the DVD you learn that the vast majority of this movie is fiction. The biggest example being the burning of the home at the end. It never burned down... ever, yet the end of the movie says that the house was " rebuilt and resold". Somebody does live in it now but it never burned to the ground or had the dead no decomposed bodies built into the walls. So taking that in to effect we see that the movie isn't really based on the true story making it just another cookie cutter haunted house film full of predictable jump scares. This is a good movie for middle school and high school kids to start their interests in horror movies. Full Review »
  3. i like haunted house films but this one loses alot of points for going all hollywood and not sticking to what was said to have happend by the family. ive seen the documenty on discovery channel before i seen this film they went way off course in the last half of the film. as a horror film its so so but i cant give alot of praise to some thing that abandons its source material. Full Review »