Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Cathardincu Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Jonah Abbott There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Realrockerhalloween Another heave hole try in the enchanting world created originally by Rod Sterling now updated for a new generation and failing terribly. Going 44 episodes the new Zone ranged from a great idea taken in a great direction before crashing and burning anticlimactically. Most of the caste were washed up hasbeens or no talents and never have any emotional impact. The opening looked cheap, a lame guitar ripe and computer cgi graphics. I could do better myself during free time without a budget. Another issue was the graphic sex scenes shoved in almost every episode making it a sensual series and quite like the revival of the outer limits instead of doing it's own thing or trying to be the brand name.I tried to give it a chance, but the show doesn't have any new offerings to serve and the old stories recreated are bland without any new twists only making you want to watch the original ones instead. Plus Forress Whitaker tries his best but his voice is to easy going not hoarse or sinister making any horror attempt fall flat.You can judge it on your own merits rather it has held up over time. But my rewatch only enforced how bad an attempt it turned out to be.

Andrei Barros This is a show that suffers for it to be qualified in "grade B". Yes, there are some sporadic episodes in the anthology that are interesting and have some good ideas. But always end failing in some of these points: weak script (seemed to have some potential), amateur direction in some cases and a lot of bad acting and overacting. Some episodes start well but end in a mediocre way. It has nothing to do with the old Rod Serling's Twilight Zone. However, if you're a fan of the series and can overcome all these lows, you will find some entertainment. But it is clear that this is a product to make money and is not too concerned with production value. For comparison purposes, when you can watch the British "Black Mirror" you will see the abysmal difference between that product with this.

jhearse I don't know why the some people seem to think this (2002) series was so bad. Sure, it's not the original. But like the remake in 1985, it has some good episodes and some weaker ones. we all loved Serling, but even some of the originals were a little weak at times. don't over-romanticize Serling. he was one of the greatest writers ever, but not just because of the twilight zone, but his great westerns, crime dramas, etc. and even the original series had a few clunkers - don't forget that he didn't write them all, anywaysCompared to what's out there, from predictable sitcoms to endless CSI/Law and Order formulaic shows, this one's not that bad. Heck, compare it to the absolutely horrible Sci-F channel movies,, yuck!So, I say. I enjoy this version just fine. heck.. it's only TV.

nlstock This 2002 version of The Twilight Zone has been advertised as "with today's hippest young stars". Well,that just about sums up this travesty because The Twilight Zone is not supposed to be MTV. This 2002 version starts off with a rock music theme and then goes downhill from there. I have not seen one good episode. The original and much better versions of The Twilight Zone made from 1959-1965(and also from 1985-1987)had scripts written by science fiction writers and had all sorts of stories. This dreadful 2002 version does not and just has doom and gloom stories that are not very well written or very well produced. I note that some of the people that were responsible for making the new version of the Outer Limits into a soft-core porn show were also involved in this awful 2002 version of the Twilight Zone. They have no idea of story at all. They should be kept away from classic TV shows before they ruin any more.