There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

First off, I must say the beginning was a masterpiece! That knock on the door was scarier than any phone call! I was about to rate it one of the greatest horror movies I had ever scene! ...However, the excitement died down to real lull towards the middle. Much like the first one, we see that same annoying private detective. Then, we have to learn about the psycho's back story. It follows the same pattern as the original to a "T". The ending was exciting, but it seemed to take too long getting there. If you liked the original, you'll love this one! It's more of a mystery and suspense thriller than an actual horror movie,with exception of that glorious first twenty minutes!

in my mind,this sequel to the original "When a Stranger Calls"(1979)is actually a better movie.i thought the story was better,with a better, much creepier and more intelligent villain.Carol Kane reprises her role from the original,and i actually thought she did a convincing job in this 1.i think that's because she plays an adult,and not a teenager.there are some interesting twists and the villain has more dimension.the overall look and feel of the film is much eerier than the original.to me,there is more of a sense of danger and distress.i have to admit the hairs on my neck stood up more than a few times.there is 1 real nail biting scene which kept me on the edge of my seat.for other recommendations,check out the review i did on the original.as for "When a Stranger Calls Back",i give it 7/10

"When a Stranger Calls Back" is really a sequel to "When a Stranger Calls" and not just a remix. The 2006 "When a Stranger Calls" is actually a remake of the first twenty or so minutes of the original 1979 version which was the superior part of the film. The 1979 original drifted aimlessly for the middle third of the movie before regaining much of its momentum for the final third.The made-for-cable "When a Stranger Calls Back" has some excellent scenes that do actually scare the heebie-jeebies out of the viewer. The use of the door rather than the telephone during the first part introduced a new aspect of the crazed psycho, that he could throw his voice. For this viewer the creepiest part occurred with Charles Durning encountering the monster in the alleyway. The cinematography with the camera zooming in on the creature all in black lurking in the darkness showing his blazon eyes before closing them for a full blackout is truly amazing. The angle of the shot showing Durning attempting to discover the hidden evil with the noir-like rain silhouetting his features is a stroke of cinema genius.That the producers were able to reunite two of the key figures in the original after fourteen years makes "When a Stranger Calls Back" even more relevant as a sequel. Carol Kane and Charles Durning reprise their roles as babysitter Jill Johnson (Jill as in kill) and John Clifford respectively to great effect. The chemistry between the two is still present."When a Stranger Calls Back" is also more believable than the other two Stranger films. For instance, the babysitter does check the children first thing the way a real babysitter would do. "When a Stranger Calls Back" is not as brutal as the other two. In the made-for-cable sequel the children simply disappear. In the other two, there is no weapon found, meaning the the killer ripped the bodies to shreds using his bare hands. If you enjoyed the 1979 flick, you should enjoy this one and the 2006 remake. All three are above average for mad slasher type suspense films.

The headline above seems to sum up some of the other reviewers' opinions of this film and I totally agree with them: I liked this sequel better. I will always remember this film for the first 20-25 minutes which really scared me the first time I saw it. It gave me the creeps, and always will if I don't watch it too often.After that, the movie settles down, and the excitement leaves, but it still keeps you interested, picking back up again at the end with another suspense scene.This is a "scare" movie - a sequel - that works although there are a few noticeable holes in the storyline. I liked the camera-work in here with the closeups of the door lock or the phone, the slowness of camera movement here and there to build suspense, etc. The ending, in which the killer blends into a wall, is very neat.The main actors are interesting to watch and a main plus is the lack of profanity, especially surprising with Charles Durning in the film. The "R" rating had to be for a couple of topless waitress scenes.Jill Schoelen gets third billing and she's the star of the movie. Carol Kane, the star of the first film: When A Stranger Calls, helps out on this case, too, and it's nice to see her again.