User Reviews (394)

Add a Review

  • Jonathan Rivers (Michael Keaton) is a successful architect. His wife, Anna (Chandra West) is an even more successful novelist. When Anna goes missing one night, they fear she is dead. Suddenly, an odd man named Raymond Price (Ian McNeice) shows up and tells Jonathan that his wife has been trying to contact him from "the other side", via Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVPs). Rivers also gradually gets wrapped up in EVPs, which lead him to some unusual situations and the heart of a mystery.

    I had a very divided reaction to White Noise. Some aspects were excellent, but in many ways, the film had potential that was never actualized. There are also some flaws that kept drawing me out of the film's universe. Overall I felt the film worked, but probably not as writer Niall Johnson and director Geoffrey Sax intended.

    Let's talk about what the film did right first. The major assets, as mentioned in the title of my review, were the production/set design, cinematography and overall atmosphere. The latter largely hinges on the first two. The production/set design and cinematography were nearly perfect. Everything was focused on the idea of white noise, especially the most well known visual depiction of white noise--television "static" or "snow". The credits introduced a motif of jarring intrusions of white noise, which occasionally recurred throughout the film (although perhaps not enough). There were clever instantiations of a visual "white noise" theme in the sets, such as the outside waterfall on the lower level of Jonathan's apartment building, and the wall of glass blocks inside his apartment. The color scheme was white, silver and blue, washed out so that the film had an almost black and white feel. There were also more abstract references to white noise, such as the running water motif (water dynamics are mathematically chaotic, as is white noise, which is also thought of as being literally random), and the arcing electricity. All of this combined to provide a wonderful, gloomy atmosphere, and in another film, would easily compensate for any minor flaws to bring the film up to a 10.

    However, there are a number of problems with White Noise. Keaton's performance was the major sticking point for me. He seems aloof and brooding throughout the entire film. While that may have been perfect for Batman, it doesn't work for me here. Both McNeice and Deborah Kara Unger (as Sarah Tate) were fine, but their roles were minor enough to not be able to carry the film. I usually like Keaton a lot, and I can't say that I dislike him here, but his performance is very odd and off-putting.

    Another problem was the pacing. For a long time, White Noise may as well have been a realist drama. While that's fine for other films, it also doesn't tend to work in a horror/thriller. The only directors I've seen really able to pull that combination off effectively are Alfred Hitchcock and M. Night Shyamalan. It takes so long to get to the horror/thriller part of the story that many people likely either lose interest by that point, or they're interested because they'd rather see a realist drama, and the more supernatural ending will be unsatisfying for them. The pacing also doesn't fit with the white noise/chaos motif. This is a film that should have been edited like a Michael Bay vehicle.

    Finally, I had a number of problems with the story. One, there are quite a few superfluous elements (such as Jonathan's son). Two, although I'm not someone who usually complains about genre combinations, there was an attempt to make White Noise both a "benevolent spirit" story, ala Ghost (1990) and a Ring (2002)-like otherworldly threat. The two just didn't meld. Three, the thriller aspect, which enters primarily at the climax of the film, seems too tacked on to engender an appropriate emotional reaction from the audience. And four, the supernatural aspects and especially the "twist revelation" of the ending are very rushed and unpleasantly ambiguous, possibly in an attempt to hide the fact that the plot in these respects wasn't very well thought out. There is a tremendous amount of potential in the script, and it is entertaining enough to marginally recommend, but this seems more like an early draft that was rushed to completion, or possibly a film that suffered a lot of studio meddling.

    The bottom line is that while there are enough positive elements to make White Noise worth a watch to serious genre fans and students of film-making, do not expect the story to grab you by the short and curlies, and do not expect much of a resolution. Enjoy the film primarily for its visuals. I'm generously rating the film a 7 out of 10.
  • Interesting. Intense. Somewhat original. All words to describe a conversation with Johnny Betts. But they also apply to Michael Keaton's White Noise. What we have here is a ghost story that tackles the subject of electronic voice phenomenon, or, as the cool kids like to call it - EVP.

    For those of you who, unlike Johnny Betts, aren't master ghost hunters, EVP is the alleged communication by spirits through the white noise of staticky radio stations, television stations, and other electronic devices. People truly believe in it, and if you do a quick search on the Internet then you can find plenty of websites with audio files they say prove the existence of EVP. Detractors will brush this off with explanations of the "chaos theory" and cross modulation. I'll let you do your own research if you're interested in the subject.

    If you're looking for a factual exploration of EVP's possible legitimacy, then you won't find it in White Noise. This is a movie that takes a subject popular with ghost hunters and glorifies it. It reminds me a little of The Mothman Prophecies, which was a fictionalized account of what was supposed to be a "true story." I have no problem with that. That's what movies are all about.

    Michael Keaton crawls out from underneath whatever rock he's been under, does his best "Bruce Willis in The Sixth Sense" impersonation, and dives into the world of receiving messages from the dead. Folks, you can nitpick the logic to death if you want, and trust me, most critics are. "Why would he just put his successful life on hold and spend all his time trying to receive messages from his wife through a bunch of radio and TV static?" Dunno. The tragic death of a spouse can do weird things to people. Plus, you know, IT'S A MOVIE! And in the movie, he actually does receive messages from the dead. I guess he figured he'd try it; it worked, so he got more involved. Lighten up. It's called fiction.

    "Yeah, well, if his wife wanted to contact him, then why wouldn't she send him clearer messages? Why does it have to be through static?" BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT EVP IS ALL ABOUT! Take it up with the proponents of EVP, not the movie. I totally agree that one of the things that makes so many people skeptical about EVP is that the messages are never complex. If I heard an EVP that said, "Tell Johnny Betts that the afterlife rules, and he should keep the Movie Mark going strong," then I'd probably be convinced. But what we get is a lot of one syllable words and sounds strung together. That's not the movie's fault. Deal with it and move on.

    As some of you know, I'm a huge fan of the thriller/horror genre. Admittedly, White Noise isn't one of the best of all time in the genre, but that's OK. It didn't convince me to run home, record a static TV channel for hours, and then play it back to see if Uncle Jack was sending me a message from the great beyond. Like an apology for that little streaking stunt that completely ruined my 16th birthday party. However, what the movie did do is entertain me. The mystery is deliberately paced, it kept my interest, and it provided some creepy moments along the way.

    Things start to get pretty intense near the end of the movie, and some people might not be happy with the finale. But keep in mind that trying to communicate with the dead is a bit of a dark subject. Some people, as the movie depicts, think that if they can contact their dead relatives then they'll have hope, they'll know all is right in the afterlife. They want some sort of message for closure. But I'm just curious, what if that message is, "Burning. Hell. I screwed up." ??? I'm guessing that'd be a bit of a kick in the pants.

    But getting back to the movie... if there's good in the afterlife, there has to be evil as well, right? In the movie, contacting the dead initially seems harmless enough. But why would you think only the good would respond if you create that human/afterlife portal? What would happen if evil decided to communicate as well? White Noise has a viewpoint on that subject, and you can't expect everything to be cute and cuddly.

    Now if you'll excuse me, I'm gonna take a closer listen to this static coming from the radio. Let's see. Sounds like Uncle Jack! I can just make it out... "Johnny. Reviews. Not funny. Quit. Now." Um, yeah, just as I thought - nothing but a little cross modulation! THE GIST White Noise is an interesting take on the ghost story, using the subject of EVP as its backdrop. It isn't what I'd call scary, but it's got its share of creepy moments and effective jump scenes. If you're looking for a docu-drama on the scientific accuracy of EVP then you might be disappointed, but if you're in the mood for a few chills to start the year then White Noise just might suit you.

    Rating: 4 (out of 5)
  • There was little closure; what happened to the three, evil ghosts? It had little dialog, and thus, it did not bring out Keaton's great acting talent. However, it was scary, and the music was impeccably timed. It reminded me of the movie, Frequency. When are they going to give Keaton some better roles? Quicksand and, now, this? If you want to see Keaton in some other films, watch Night Shift (funny), Clean and Sober (tragic), and The Paper (crazy). If you want to see some better written, new scary movies, watch Signs and What Lies Beneath. However, if you just want to go to the movies to be scared, the film is worth the money; it does keep you on the edge of your seat.
  • White Noise is a film that takes a true scientific phenomenon, and makes a film out of it. The phenomenon is one which involves electronic recording/broadcast equipment. In amongst white-noise (that crackle and hiss you get on a blank recording) and static on untuned TV reception there are voices and images discernible. Sometimes these voices have been clear enough to work out, and many people believe they are the voices and images of those who have died, trying to contact the living.

    In the film, Michael Keaton plays Jonathan Rivers, an estate agent who loses his wife. When he is approached by Raymond, a man who lost his son years ago and claims he has heard from Jonathan's wife, it draws him into the phenomenon, and pretty soon he becomes obsessed, recording his own tapes and viewing/listening to them for messages. Then, suddenly, the messages become clear, and seem to be premonitions. Can he decipher the meaning of the messages, or will he disturb something best left alone? I was uncertain going into the film what to expect. Too many times the film world have come up with a great concept, but failed to deliver anything more than mediocre when it is a horror subject. Expecting another Godsend, I was pleasantly surprised to find a pretty good film, with some nice touches, and chills. Admittedly the story wouldn't look out of place on X-Files, but unlike the recent The Forgotten, it manages to feel complete, and doesn't seem to take the easy option at the end.

    The direction by Sax (best know for his TV work such as Tipping the Velvet, Dr Who, Clocking Off, and Spitting Image to name a few) is more than sufficient, and he uses the white-noise to great effect. A little buzz here, and flicker there all serve to unnerve, and you could be forgiven for thinking you are watching another Japanese adaptation. There are a lot of similarities to eastern horror throughout, the use of silence the unnerve, the distorted images in the TV sets, and so on. Only the occasion "music to let you know you should jump" lets down the tone.

    Nevertheless, with a well woven script which doesn't pander to the lowest denominator, and a sterling performance from Michael Keaton, who hasn't really had a presence on the screen since 1998s Jack Frost, make this an enjoyable little movie which deserves a viewing or two.
  • I first heard about White Noise when I saw the TV advert. Before then I didn't even know it existed. I watched the trailer online and decided that I would go and see it. Now being a fan of films like The Sixth Sense, I thought that this film would give me everything I wanted. It has Michael Keaton in it, and he rocks. Unfortunately the film did not deliver. It tried to be another Sixth Sense or Stir of Echoes, and failed miserably. It has a very promising start, but the middle just drags on repeating itself, and ends with a completely poor twist which any monkey could have figured out. Unfortunately like most "Scary" films nowadays it relies on loud noises and bangs to make the audience jump. This film could have been so much more. It's a shame because it was a good idea.
  • What a shame it is when a potentially captivating and refreshingly low-key story manages to latch onto your interest at the start and then gradually lets you down further and further until you're left scratching your mystified head by the time it reaches its overdone conclusion. Unfortunately, this is what happened to me by the end of WHITE NOISE.

    It wasn't Michael Keaton's fault; it was a pleasure to see him return as the star of a brand new movie once again, looking a bit wrinkled perhaps, but still managing to give a strong and sincere performance. As a man whose wife has recently died, he becomes obsessed with her wandering spirit in the afterlife (not a new idea), apparently getting contacted by her through that funky electrical fuzz business you see on your television screen when there's nothing being broadcast.

    The idea of spirits communicating via the airwaves is called EVP (Electronic Voice Phenomena) and there are a lot of people who actually believe in it for real, so I'm not going to make any comments about what I think of that, or them. Let me just say that I'm all for suspension of disbelief when it comes to buying into fantastic films like this, but what I can't tolerate is not understanding what the hell was supposed to be taking place, which is about where I was left stranded when the credits finally began to roll. Much static indeed.

    There are occasionally movies like this that have me completely baffled, but if a film fails to make itself clear for me, I tend to consider that to be the fault of the filmmaker, not my own (unless I watched it while I was too tired to focus or something). Well, for WHITE NOISE I was wide awake, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed -- so guess who's to blame?
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Absolutely one of the worst movies of the year. The plot is ridiculous, the characters poorly developed, and the premise irritatingly stupid. It all begins when Michael Keaton, fresh off of doing nothing noteworthy since Batman, loses his beautiful author wife, Anna, to a car accident, possibly caused by her driving one of those convertible VW bugs even though she's supposed to be rich. In his grief, Batman moves to a new apartment and takes up a hobby: recording nothing and then watching it. He learned this from a really fat pathetic guy who got murdered by three tall shadowy fellows who lived in his TV. Pretty soon, he starts to see dead people, thanks to EVP, or Electronic Voice Phenomenon, which is evidently this deal wherein dead people can send messages to living people through tape recorders, video cameras, dead cell phones ("Anna cell calling? But she's...DEAD!...Must be ghosts. Mhmmm. No other possible explanation. I'd better start messing around with this indiscriminately.") etc. Why they can't just write something down on a piece of paper or knock over some stuff to form creative pictograms is never explained. ANyway, eventually Batman discovers that he's actually seeing the future, and he decides to go help this woman he doesn't know. He gets out of his house just in the nick of time, because the tall dark guys enter just after he leaves ("D*mn it! Can travel between the living and dead using electronics, but I'll be d*mned if we can be on time! Am I right guys? (They nod in bemused agreement)."). He tracks this lady to a warehouse and finds out that this character from the first ten minutes of the movie (look hard, or you'll miss him!) is actually a serial killer working for three tall shadowy demons, who in Raiders of the Lost Ark style swoop down and kill him, looking like the cartoons that they are. Just then some detectives show up and save the lady. After Batman's funeral, he decides to send a message from beyond the grave apologizing to his son for being an idiot, evidently feeling that the best way to protect his kid from the horrors of EVP is to expose him to it. The little kid just smiles. Nothing phases that dude, not even when his dad, Batman of course, starts talking to TV's. The high-point of the movie was when someone's phone rang and some guy yelled out, "It's Anna!"
  • Michael Keaton gives a good performance as architect Jonathan Rivers. I found the movie good and thrilling at times but it somehow lost its phase in the end. But then again that's also the case with many films like Timecop and Hard Cash.

    Storywise the movie was quite good. The idea of a device which can record our personalities after death is quite interesting. A quote by Thomas Edison made in 1928, which is used in the beginning of the movie, states: "Nobody knows whether our personalities pass on to another existence or sphere, but if we can evolve an instrument so delicate as to be manipulated by our personality as it survives in the next life such an instrument ought to record something." The concept of E.V.P.; (Electronic Voice Phenomenon) is elaborated on through the entire movie and it leaves us still thinking.

    The directing and the way it's written holds up pretty good up until about 2/3 in the movie. The characters and Michael's acting as a father is quite good and not flawed in any way. The story flows in a good and convincing way. But it's in the end where it starts to get a little hectic. There's a twist to the story which sorta destroys the original set up and it becomes a tad....well dull and inconsistent to be perfectly blunt.

    But all in all this is an enjoyable film. Just don't expect to be blown away.
  • triedit14 December 2004
    I recently was allowed to view this movie at a press screening. I can tell you as a professional ghost researcher, the portrayals are quite realistic and believable. The characters are accurate and the subject of Electronic Voice Phenomena is well represented.

    It is a Hollywood-esquire movie in that some things are portrayed a little bigger than real life, but that in no way detracts from the believability of the movie. It has none of the fantasy that things like "Ghostbusters" bestowed upon a naive audience.

    I loved this movie. Truly. It touched me on a personal level. It made me think about some of the more risky possibilities of my profession. And some parts really made me jump in my seat!

    See it. At least twice.
  • Nellie4295 January 2005
    It has been a very long time since I have seen a movie and actually thought it was scary. I was very surprised when half way through this movie I thought I may have broken my husband's hand because I was squeezing so hard. While the beginning of the movie is a little slow, it pulls you along because you can sense something is going to happen. When it does, I was not disappointed at all.

    I thought the acting was great even though Michael Keaton is not aging well. It was filmed entirely in Vancouver and was beautiful to watch. The traditional scary effects are used well and wisely and you will jump, despite preparing yourself for the scare. While I am not a believer in ghosts, this movie made me think and forever question and fear white noise.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Keaton loses his wife tragically, is approached by a psychic who claims he's getting messages from her through the static on broadcast equipment. At first skeptical, Keaton eventually becomes obsessed, only to learn there's some down sides to the whole "Electronic Voice Phenomenon" experience.

    It's an interesting premise for a horror film. Keaton is excellent, playing a nice, normal guy slowly going off the rails very convincingly. There are a couple of effective jolts and scares, especially in the middle part of the movie.

    There are two main problems with the movie. One is the climax, which is absolutely horrendous, bringing in a serial killer and involving other characters in the movie in an absolutely unbelievable, contrived kind of way.

    The other is that the movie tries to be serious and sober-minded about it's subject matter, which is admirable, but it's serious only in tone, not content. So we have a lengthy set up to ease us into the horror, which is a good idea -- but we also apparently are in a world where nobody thinks psychics con them. There are efforts to plug obvious plot holes, which is good, but we still have Keaton behaving like every other horror movie fruitcake, Abandoning the Woman Whom He's Sworn to Protect; Delving Into Things Man Was Not Meant To Know; Going Into The Spooky Place Alone.

    In other words, the movie's not really serious -- it doesn't really want to investigate this idea intelligently. It's using "seriousness" as a pose, much as another might use "ironic". And that's a real problem, because just as you're being lulled into thinking this is something different and special, you get bumped up against some stunning stupidity that ruins the mood. Then just when you adjust to the cheesiness, we go back to seriousness again, which ruins *that* mood. And so on.

    The blame I think has to go with the director, who after all controls the vibe of the movie. It's kind of depressing -- I think there's a good movie in here somewhere. Better hands might have brought it out.
  • What you bear with you when you go to this movie will affect how much you enjoy this picture. If you go with an intense curiosity for the subject of EVP, but have no prior knowledge of it, you will be somewhat disappointed, as the picture does not explain the the phenomena adequately. If you go in a bona fide skeptic, you are likely to leave as a disgruntled skeptic.

    As for me, having had prior knowledge on the subject matter, I went to this movie quite eagerly, and was only slightly disappointed. The film did depict a newly widowed man's grief, and the desperation that sometimes follows such a loss. Although not many will go as far as to attempt contact via electronic devices, we can identify with the protagonist's need for closure. for who hasn't longed for that last conversation, kind word or even a farewell from a deceased loved one.

    The actors were proficient in their roles, and a number of scenes left me quite shocked and unsettled. That is saying quite a lot, as I've tried my hand at contacting the spirit world before, but have never seen such a frightening experience as that endured by the protagonists.

    The only things that detracted from the movie was its ending and its confusing pace. Although the first third of the movie went at an almost too slow pace, it was easy to follow. The latter 2/3s of the program could get confusing, and almost felt like some one stomped into the studio whilst they were filming and said "Come on then! Get a move on! We haven't got until Gabriel's trumpet resounds!" It simply went to quickly, hence my decision to see it twice. Not to spoil anything for those who have not seen this picture yet, but the latter part of the movie left matters to be desired.

    The generous rating is warranted however, for creating an interesting movie around something as time-consuming and often unrewarding as EVP is quite a feat in and of itself. True, they have embellished things quite a bit, but if they hadn't, they'd not attract as wide an audience. The special effects were done well, and the director did the splendid job of keeping the audience tense for the greater part of the picture.

    If you purchase the DVD, plan to watch it twice or thrice to get the most enjoyment out of it. Remember to watch also with an open mind, and at least some prior knowledge to the EVP phenomenon. Happy watching.
  • Sorry to tell you that this movie has one of the worst scripts ever. It's just a shame, too -- because I like Michael Keaton and think he has one of the sexiest mouths I've ever seen (and I'm probably old enough to be his mother). I really wanted to like this flick since I couldn't recall the last movie I'd seen him in.

    On the positive side, "White Noise" was well acted and directed. The scary effects were jolting. The music was exciting and helped to build the tension. The characters were interesting and, although I don't particularly believe in ghosts, I felt some emotional bond with this theme.

    Aside from that, the movie's script makes little or no sense. The ending was unforgivably dumb and for me, the movie was a big waste of time. My husband fell asleep for the last twenty minutes, so he was in a better place for the incredibly unmotivated ending.

    I didn't stay for the credits. Where was this film shot? There are no filming locations noted here at IMDb. The only clue was one character has a business card that says "Washington" and area code 206.

    I'm giving it a "D" and just cannot recommend this movie. However, there are some January holdovers that may pique your interest. Try "The Aviator" -- "Kinsey" -- or "Sideways" this weekend.

    See you at the movies!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I frequently comment on the utter dirth of truly scary movies on the market, and sadly White Noise only served to reduce my faith that the film industry remains capable of such an endeavor. I was surprised to find myself growingly increasingly fatigued as the plot wore on and my static-induced headache increased. I found White Noise to be preposterous beyond our best efforts of suspension of disbelief. Even after witnessing the harrowing ordeal sustained by Michael Keaton, I was totally unaffected by his demise. Up until the credits I diligently awaited for something--anything-- of substance to connect me to the characters' story, but such relief never came. Sure, there were the occasional heart-stopper moments, but only because loud noises tend to do that to the dozing viewer.

    While the acting was lame, Michael Keaton may have played his studliest role to date. Perhaps the only redeeming quality that White Noise has to offer is the stunning archietecture in both of Keaton's abodes. Overall, White Noise leaves one with the morbidly depressing idea that those who die are trapped in a world guarded by three malicious shadows, contriving to trick the living into following the dead to their own graves.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    How scary is this film? I'd say it's a lot scarier than those horror films with a knife wielding guy in a mask. This is a film that will play with your mind - and make a jump a fair few times as well.

    I'll just outline the story: John Rivers is a successful architect, and is married to author Anna. When Anna goes missing, John is sure she is alive, but a few weeks later found out she has died. He starts receiving weird answer-phone messages and Anna's cell phone rings him. He is contacted by Raymond, who offers him the chance to listen to his wife via E.V.P (Electronic Voice Phenomenon), and it is not long before John is obsessed with recording these voices, with consequences.....

    This is one of those films that uses suspense to good effect. There is good use of static as background noise (as static plays a big part in this film) and some parts will genuinely scare you. I was a bit disappointed with the end - but while it lasts this is a cracking, and genuinely scary, film.

    8/10
  • I don't think I've ever been so bowled over by the sheer absurdity of a movie in my entire life as i was when i walked out of this piece of crap. NOTHING in it makes any sense. none of it is clever or well thought out. out of lack of truly suspenseful moments they repeatedly use that total cop-out trick where you build up the music before the character does something like open a door or push aside a curtain and then nothing's there. thats OK to do once, maybe, but i counted three times. there are things thrown in for no apparent reason, characters, half-formed story lines.... the characters weren't well developed at ALL. the ending was.. bad. bad, bad, bad, everything, every component, of this film is terrible. and I'm just here to warn you all of that.
  • White Noise is in fact on of the worst movies of all time, there was no plot and it was not scary at all. After seeing it I was wondering what the hell I just sat through. The story was predictable and the ending was left open for a sequel even though that would be the worst idea for the director and cast. At the end of the movie you really didn't know what was going on. I pretty much understood the whole movie, but the end was confusing. Don't go waste your time with this movie just wait till it's free on TV and that's if you really still want to see it. White Noise is a piece of trash and not worth eight dollars to go see. Don't bother going to see it save your money and invest it.
  • cyclops14aw3 August 2005
    some interesting themes and concepts explored within this film. Entirely possible? .... Many researchers think so. But apart from the films plausibility and accreditation amongst the Para-scientific community it does seem to inspire a certain believable element. Whether from a scientific, artistic, atheist or religious background, most people will have experienced something that they can relate to this film....not always talked about, perhaps deliberately avoided in conversation but i'm sure many will draw inexplicable parallels with this film. Enjoy as an interesting piece of entertainment if you must, but if possible, explore the possibilities.
  • Smells_Like_Cheese16 January 2005
    3/10
    What?
    The idea was awesome, the actors were incredible, the story could of been very scary, but the writing was poor and there was no depth. I couldn't really get into this movie. I couldn't feel for the characters, there were a lot of cliffhangers, and the movie just ends very weirdly. Was it a happy ending? I don't know. Was it a sad ending? Again, I don't know. You leave the theater feeling unsatisfied. The movie had so much to give, but couldn't. Just because you can edit, doesn't mean you should, right? I wouldn't really recommend this movie because you just can't say that you left the movie feeling like it was completed. You'll just be confused. Trust me, you will probably thank me if you don't watch this movie.

    3/10
  • bajopalabra15 June 2017
    I don't know why it has just 5.5/10 points.... I saw the movie on vacations, a dark night, I began to hear noises everywhere, my god, what a moment. For me the movie paid what it promises: it promises fear, so you get fear. Perhaps the context has much to do, I don't know. The characters are believable, and I found it very well conceived
  • A pet peeve of mine = Screwy sound levels.

    Director doesn't have faith in the writing obviously because he is too dependent on being inconsistent with noise levels.

    "Scary" movies that depend on me having to up and down the volume of my TV set to avoid screaming mouths and soft voiced actresses kind of, suck.

    I switched from the movie to watch Lucky Louie. Now there's some good writing. =p

    Apparently I have to write more in depth about the movie to make this submission. I guess this means my comment isn't worthy and will be eventually withdrawn. Is IMDb owned by Hollywood? Probably. Gross.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I was very disappointed that Michael Keaton was involved with this movie once I was about 5 minutes into it because it immediately became clear to me that this was intended as a pilot for a television series. Just like a poorly acted version of the Dead Zone, the hero has a brush with the afterlife and then turns into a hero warning about problems to come. No, I said, if he dies then how could they...Oh yeah, the guy in the Dead Zone died in the movie, too. Believe me, I did you a favor letting you know what happened in this movie. It wasn't much and not worth the money or two hours of your life. Shame on you Michael. Pull your bat cape over your face in shame.
  • SO this movie was really good, up until the end. It seems to me that the writers/producers/director themselves did not know how to end this movie, so they just through something together and called it an ending.

    Its really disappointing because this movie really had some great potential. Suspenseful, edge-of-your-seat, decent cast and plot, with some really decent scares. Michael Keaton did a great job, very believable and you really felt for him throughout. But then major letdown at the end.

    Try shutting it off with 10 min left and make up your own ending with your friends, you'll be less disappointed!
  • jpsemprini31 December 2005
    This was just a very inane movie. The basic premise of the movie, communications from the dead, is very worthy of putting on film. But something went terribly wrong here. I don't consider myself the most intelligent person in the world, but I certainly am not the most obtuse. I found the ending of this film totally confusing. Not only did I not fully understand the basic action of the plot, by that point I didn't really care. And to me, that is the death knell of a movie--not even caring that you didn't figure it out. I rated the film a 2 (instead of a 1) for two reasons: 1) the subject matter, even though not presented very well, is still a fascinating notion and 2) given the inadequacies of the script and direction, I still thought the performances were not the worst I have ever seen.
  • william8610 December 2005
    this movie is so boring, I know that once in a while that something horror related would happen, but it is usually the predictable type when it does happen, and it is defiantly not worth watching

    the film only made a lot of money because they made the TV spots to it look like an interesting horror movie, but it really is a piece of crap movie

    only 1 scene that might scare you but that's all

    the movie also has an interesting looking movie poster, too bad the poster is based on a boring crappy ass movie

    I think the only benefit that you could get out of watching White Noise is that you would have a movie that you could put on your list of the top ten worst movies of 2005
An error has occured. Please try again.