You ever see a movie and think, who directed this?  Not in an incredulous “who the hell made this shit?” but in a genuine “why is this so good and suddenly not?” sort of way?

So much so, you immediately contemplate: “Did more than one person direct this?”

Thus we come to The First Omen.  The prequel (when is it NOT a prequel these days?) to the all-time 1976 classic The Omen.

Any feature film director, let alone a relatively new one, knows that the first few minutes of a film are incredibly important.  Impact is important.

And the best directors achieve Impact by directing well.  Subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) lens choices, camera angles, camera movement, framing, acting direction, editing decisions, sound design, music cues – the list goes on.

And the first thing The First Omen does is make good choices.  And when I say first thing, I mean the first things we see.

From the get-go the opening scene invokes the feel and tone of the first film.  The bleak overcast, almost oppressive pitch that made Richard Donner’s masterpiece a quintessential 70’s horror is replicated well here, and the Impact Moment that soon follows hits the mark with a promise that this could be more than a paint-by-numbers cash grab.

So what happens after that?

Well for one thing is starts to get a little too 70’s, in that after such a good start, you soon find yourself wondering where is this going?  In an attempt to set up tension (like all good horror films should) it delves into a usual set of characters that you spend valuable minutes deciding whether or not they’re a good-guy in disguise, or a bad-guy in disguise (FYI, you’re guesses will be right).

But the thread the film weaves as we follow its lead – a nun in waiting called Margaret Daino (played by Nell Tiger Free) as she bounces from one character interaction to another, is less rollercoaster and more nomadic.

And a lot of this has to do with direction.  Not that it gets terrible after the first scene.  In fact, it’s quite creditable.  BUT fine is a far cry from great.  And after a number of ok scenes, you do start to wonder “where are the cares and where are the scares?”

Now some of this may not partially (or even solely) be the fault of the director – production company and studio politics (read: interference) is a genuine thing.  But the good action callers know that once out of the blocks, you don’t let up.  Especially for this sort of film. 

Hence my opening tender: “Were different parts of this thing directed by different people”?

This is especially felt during one of the films more tentpole horror moments that the makers were no doubt hoping would be iconic, but is so over the top on paper, it was always going to require a deft hand to ensure it doesn’t fall into farce on screen.

But it does.  And so too the next scene, and the scene after that!  All are so unsubtly on the nose, it’s disappointing.

Having said that, there is a decent enough twist regarding the motivation of the antagonists (the people who want to see the Anti-Christ born) that lies outside of the moustache twirling motive “We are Satanists, so we are evil bahaha.  Derr”.

And the films end dovetails neatly into the events of the 1976 Richard Donner movie.  And when it does, it closes out with an interesting character still alive that promises much for The (presumably) 2^nd Omen.

Mind you, how they’ll get that storyline to work without mucking up the timeline or logic of the current existing “sequels” is anybody’s omen.  Sorry, guess.

The Prognosis:

Promises much at the start, but lacks the strength of a true single-minded auteur at the wheel to guide it.  Still, it will be interesting to see if there’ll be an anti-anti-Christ installed for the next chapter.  Such an interesting idea would be a good sign.

• Antony Yee