Rating: 
Summary: Shirley Jackson meets Stephen King
Review: Let me start off by saying that I love the work of Stephen King. I have read every novel and collection that he has released and enjoyed many of his adaptations but this story lacked one thing. ORIGINALITY! All Stephen King has done is update the The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson for the special effects crowd and that had already been done by Liam Neeson and gang a couple of years ago. The main characters in both Robert Wise's 1963 adaptation and Stephen King's current spook house story are not really likeable. The only character of a heroic nature in Rose Red is the character played by Julian Sands and he does not live to see the end. His character was the most enjoyable and interesting. The Amityville Horror was much better than this claptrap. I did like the Winchester House angle and perhaps if they told that house's story, the movie would have been much better. I would also have presented more demonic forces and perhaps possession. In addition, the beginning of the film was overdrawn and we do not really get to see the house until nearly 90 minutes into the movie. This might have made a good 4 hour miniseries but 6 hours was a little tedious. For better chills, rent 1945's "The Uninvited", 1963's "The Haunting" by Robert Wise, Richard Matheson's "The Legend Of Hell House" with Roddy McDowall, "The Amityville Horror, or even Stephen King's (not Kubrick's) "The Shining". All provide better chills and more originality.
Rating:
Summary: It didn't scare me even a little
Review: I'm surprised by how many lived. I'm also puzzled over the choices of who died. This movie goes through its hauntings without explaining enough.Why on Earth was Joyce Reardon so psychotically OBSESSED with Rose Red? It's never explained...nor is it explained how she came to know all these people that she would pay for their appearances at the house. Apparently the good doctor needed proof that the house was alive and kickin'. When she got her proof, she wanted more. Why, I don't know. I guess she wanted to unlock more secrets of the place, and folks dying kind of took a back seat to that hunger. But WHY? Why was she so obsessed? We'll never know, I suppose. Her acting was miserable. The acting of David Dukes (rest his soul) was miserable. Julian Sands was the best thing that happened to this movie that apparently strove to hire as many over-actors as possible. Average rating for an average movie.
Rating: 
Summary: BEST MOVIE EVER!
Review: I love Rose Red! I saw the miniseries and I absolutely loved it! I couldn't stop talking about it for the next two or so weeks. One character I love is Emery Waterman. I'm sure anyone with a sense of humor will love him. I do! (but then again, I'm not with the "in crowd" as far as movies or movie characters go) I highly recommend it to anyone over the age of...thirteen. It was scary and haunting, but the fear wears off the day after you see it. While the miniseries was on T.V, I couldn't wait to watch it. Watching Rose Red was the highlight of my day. GET ROSE RED, IT'S THE BEST MODERN HORROR MOVE YOU'LL EVER SEE!
Rating:
Summary: Very Entertaining, Great Visual Effects
Review: Since this DVD was 2 disks I expected to watch it over 2 or even 3 nights. But I got so involved with the characters that it became an all night marathon. The story is in the true tradition of Stephen King a study in the relationships of the characters, some alive some dead, with eachother and how they are changed by their experience. We are enticed by this and as each character becomes a real person to us we just HAVE to find out what happens to each one. The death of actor David Dukes was unfortunate and left us wondering what happened to his character, Prof. Miller. I guess we will have to read the book to find out. Casting was very good, the scenery and effects were fabulous. I enjoyed the special feature "The Making of Rose Red" but the "The Diary of ..." was too fake for me like The Blair Witch or Jersey Devil. It was just "fluff" for the DVD I guess. But, as a movie, this is a wonderful addition to any haunted library.
Rating: 
Summary: WELL DONE MR. KING
Review: BOUGHT THE DVD ON WEDNESDAY AND WATCHED THAT FRIDAY. I WATCHED THE ENTIRE MOVIE FROM START TO FINISH AND WAS ABSOLUTELY AMAZED BY THE STORY, FOR IT WAS VERY INTERSTING AND I LIKED THE FACT THAT THEY INCORPORATED A BIT OF HISTORY INTO IT AS WELL. PLEASE WATCH THIS MOVIE ALSO WITH AN OPEN MIND. P.S. PLEASE IGNORE THE NEGATIVE REVIEWS, WATCH AND USE YOUR OWN JUDGMENT.
Rating: 
Summary: Too long, too dull, too cliched
Review: If you've never seen a haunted house movie, read a haunted house book, AND never read a Stephen King novel, you're in for a treat. But if you have, there's really nothing new here. As clones of Shirley Jackson's excellent "The Haunting of Hill House" go, the best that can be said of this is that it's slightly better than the Liam Neeson version. But in the end, it's still a long train wreck of cliches and the usual cast of King stock characters, few of whom I was able to care about this time around, though Julian Sands' Nick was enjoyable. And it was nice to see Mr. King himself making another Hitchcockian cameo. He looks well. The special effects are nothing to write home about. This was made for TV and it shows. One of the oddest things, however, is that a companion book has been published, supposedly by the main character, psychic researcher and nutcase, Joyce Reardon. Cleverly marketed to look like a non fiction book, it is supposedly the journal of the house's original occupant, Ellen Rimbaurer. It's not terribly good, but it does fill in a considerable number of plot holes. I accidentally read about half of it (before giving up in boredom) first, not realizing what it was. Judging from the sprinkling of the angry or confused reviews at the book site on Amazon.com, I'm not the only one who was tricked this way. I'm not sure how much sense the movie would have made without that background, but both book and movie were still flat and disappointing. Then again, the shady marketing did its job, getting this consumer to waste money on two products, rather than just one. As a long time King fan, I was hoping for at least a juicy burger, if not a nice steak sandwich. All I got was a dustpan's worth of stale popcorn. If you liked this movie, or if you're disappointed and need a quick fix of something better, try these excellent Stephen King books: The Shining
'Salem's Lot
Carrie
The Stand
Misery
Different Seasons
Four Past Midnight and Shirley Jackson's wonderful The Haunting of Hill House. The 1963 film adaptation is also very good. However, Rose Red has stolen so much from both that you may be robbed of their deserved impact and that's a shame. Just remember that Jackson wrote hers first.
Rating:
Summary: A Real Good Movie
Review: At first I was not sure if I would like this movie as I've thought a lot of Stephen King movies were corny, in fact, the only other Stephen King movie I enjoyed was the first Carrie movie (Sissy Speack).
But I was bored and the ad in "people magazine" made it look interesting so I thought I'll watch it.
I was wrong!! It wasn't corny or bad as I thought, It was actually good and there wasn't tons of gore like in most of King's movies.
I liked the thought it was based on the Winchester House. :-)
I now own the DVD. Great movie to watch if you've seen the "Haunting" and if you enjoy not so gory movies! But I still wouldn't recommend this to those who get scared easily :-)
Great movie if you're into Psyhic stuff, the Paranormal, haunted houses, stephen king's works, scary movies :-)
Rating:
Summary: ZERO Stars for this [junk]!
Review: Yes, for those who are being mislead. This is a TV MOVIE. I could go and say that that was the reason it was bad, but this is not the case (and I do like a lot of TV movies). Man, Stephen King, the network ABC and the actors, writers, and producers messed up big on this one. I mean, it is pure slop. The premise was okay, and some parts were promising, but I don't see how someone could get that this movie is scary. ALL of the acting is bad. Horrible is a better word. The legend behind the house was too convoluted and by the 4th hour of the movie, you want the characters to start getting killed off more so something interesting will happen. PLEASE DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY ON THIS. It is pure and total [junk that isn't even scary. If you are interested in scary, watch KISS THE GIRLS.
Rating:
Summary: KILLER!
Review: The mark of a great horror movie/story is that it scares the ... out of you, but you just can't stop watching/reading it. King has always been the master of this & he strikes again here! Don't believe any negative reviews of this. I was surprised to find out that this was done in 5.1 which only adds to the greatness of it. The sound & picture are wonderful & the story a real edge-of-your-seat ride. I really enjoyed this & might have to purchase it.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Everything Comes Up Roses
Review: Who doesn't love a good haunted house movie?. I'm always game for that as long as it is done right. This three part T.V. mini-series gets it half right. It doesn't hit on all the right spots that you'd want. This is an original story by Stephen King written specifically for the little screen. I believe this happened only one other time with "Storm Of The Century". With King writing, you would of expected something a bit better. Here we go. Nancy Travis stars as Dr. Joyce Reardon, a professor who was once respected but is now sort of regarded as a joke since she has gone into the paranormal. Sort of like Agent Scully on "The X Files" in a way. She plans on going on an expedition to the Rimbauer house in Seattle. A big, scary, victorian like mansion that is supposedly haunted. She brings along a team of people, each with their own power, to the house. But, the one thing she needs is a telekinetic little girl named Annie(played by Kimberly J. Brown)who she believes is the one with the power to awaken the ghosts within. As the movie goes along, it's clear that Joyce has other intentions. I have to say the movie looks good and is filmed sharply. The flashback scenes showing the origin of the house and it's owners was nicely done. Most of the characters are very good and well thought out. The performances from the cast are very good, but with a few exceptions. Kimberly Brown as Annie just does the quiet, odd little girl routine. It is a strictly 'by the numbers' performance. Nancy Travis seems to be very wrongly cast in role of Joyce Reardon. She just doesn't ring true. Matt Ross is the best of the bunch really making his character the best. And then there is David Dukes. He plays his professor character with the most arrogant, pompus scene stealing bravado he could muster. He does it very well. One of the better cast members. Sadly, he passed away halfway thru filming from a heart attack. A stand in came in and doubled for him for the remainder of his scenes. You can really tell it's the stand in too. The thing that really ruins this movie is the fact that it's a 3 part mini-series. There is so much padding in the movie that is dampers the whole thing. We are talking four hours or so without commercials. The good stuff that is really good and effective is long forgotten in between scenes that it doesn't hold any lasting effect. The movie would of benefited better if it were a shorter, normal movie. The effects are adequate, but the flying ghost at the end was laughably bad. The make-up is okay, but nothing over the top incredible. It is a very entertaining movie, don't get me wrong, but it is stretched so thin that it nearly vanishes before your very eyes. We expected something stronger and more long lasting from King. "Rose Red" isn't his best venture into T.V., that honor goes to his re-working of "The Shining" a few years ago, but it is a decent effort. It had the potential and talent behind it to of been so much better. The cast includes some familiar faces like Kevin Tighe("K-9", "What's Eating Gilbert Grape"), Julian Sands("Warlock", "Arachnophobia"), Matt Kesslar("Scream 3"), and Judith Ivey("Designing Women"). And, of course, the humorous cameo from King himself. The movie wasn't rosey or red enough. Maybe next time.
|
