A lot has been discussed about whether this movie is really a sequel to the 1990 version or if it's a remake. Whatever it is, it feels an awful lot like the same movie. The one thing that could distinguish between the two are the presence of Keifer Sutherland. After having seen the movie, I don't even know if he's playing the same character from the original or not. Having him appear here felt pretty pointless. There's also no references or mentions of the previous experiment from the first film, further proving that this is in fact more of a remake. The characters and the things they do felt a lot like the ones in the original. One positive I will say is, I was glad to see the movie had the guts to kill off a character. In the first one, other than Sutherland's character, you never feel like any of them are in any real physical danger from their post-flatlining experiences. Here it feels like the stakes are upped a little more.
All in all, it just felt like a really unnecessary sequel/remake that just didn't do a whole lot to set itself apart.
14 out of 25 found this helpful