IMDb > "Rose Red" (2002) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
"Rose Red"
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditsepisode listepisodes castepisode ratings... by rating... by votes
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summaryplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
"Rose Red" More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 13 of 31: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [Next]
Index 303 reviews in total 

Wonderful Movie!

10/10
Author: ang11223 from New York, USA
2 February 2002

The best screenplay, in my opinion, that King has ever done. Not unlike THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE by S. Jackson, it has suspense and thrills that I have been craving for in a visual for a long time now! Although maybe a bit predictable, I enjoyed every spine-tingling moment of all three parts.

Was the above review useful to you?

Excellent!

10/10
Author: debmize from Hartwell, Georgia
2 February 2002

I thought it was totally Stephen King. It kept me on the edge of my seat throughout the whole series. I hope they bring it out in book form so I can add it to my collection. I can't wait to see what they come out with next. I am a BIG fan!!!

Was the above review useful to you?

oh so disappointing

Author: makin 6 figs from london, england
1 February 2002

Liked part one, liked part two...man did part three suck. I really don't like TV "horror" movies as a rule, but in the beginning Rose Red seemed promising. I mean I had to give it a chance, it was King after all, but I think from now on I'll stick to my rule. PS- it absolutely DID NOT need to be six hours long. That's wasted time I'm not getting back. They could have scrunched it into a 2 part, 4 hour.

2/10

Was the above review useful to you?

A Classic in the style of The House on Haunted Hill

Author: blackcanyonecho-1 from Arizona
1 February 2002

As a person with a penchant for "haunted house" movies, I was delighted with this new favorite. I can't wait to purchase the DVD to add to my collection of strange and wonderful movies. It had a great cast, great sets and was thoroughly delightful. People will want to watch this movie for an entertaining evening.

Was the above review useful to you?

Thorny Plot Points; Needs Pruning

Author: failedscreenwriter from California
1 February 2002

It seems many of King's stories don't translate to the screen so well. This one was written for TV and is no exception. After a good start and great setup, the plot meanders through six hours toward a muddled resolution. A couple of characters simply stop being there (*not* the disappearances that are part of the plot; they just stop being in the script) and entire plot points aren't discussed or merely wander off. One character seems to have two names, one of them being used only by one other character. We're never told why. Viewing this miniseries, it seems that several key events were cut out and a lot of fluff left in.

In short, Rose Red would have made a great *four-hour* miniseries—with a different editor.

Was the above review useful to you?

Disappointing, not suspenseful (semi-spoilers)

Author: hawktwo from Washington DC
1 February 2002

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The suspense and horror in Stephen King's writing comes from the fact that normal people truly experience ab-normal ghosts and events. It was difficult to find characters that seemed normal. There were a number of elements that seemed more like mugging to the camera rather than acting. Among them: constant closeups of Annie Wheaton looking wistful and wearing red (actress Kimberly Brown); David Dukes playing Professor Miller as a buffoon rather than a serious professor and similarly both mother and son Waterman broadly played as the mother and the mama's boy. This viewer was left with not knowing whether I was watching an intentional parody or just poor acting. The suspense simply wasn't there. I was quite disappointed in how the truth was revealed. We had 5 hours building up to the revealing moments and it flew by so suddenly that one wasn't really sure if the mystery was revealed or not. The logic escaped me a bit also. If the house is the evil element here, it's the ghosts who get the blame in the end. If the real truth was that the aunt and mother somehow were still alive, then why did they show up as ghosts at the end?

Was the above review useful to you?

What a Piece of Crap!!

Author: upperus100 from Canton, Ohio
1 February 2002

Don't waste your time.

Boring characters, no thrills, no scares.

The story leaves you wondering why the land was originally haunted.

AVOID THIS MOVIE

Was the above review useful to you?

Not scary!

Author: astymegoesby from United States
31 January 2002

Rose Red which was not written by Stephen King but by Ellen Rimbauer is a cheap rip off of the Haunting and a few other good movies. The special effects are boring and the fact that the movie is nearly 6 hours long makes it drawn out and dull after the first 2 hours. Matt Keesler and Julian Sands really stand out as the two more believable actors. Too confusing to follow after a while and stupid in most parts. Out of 10 stars, I give Rose Red 2 1/2.

Was the above review useful to you?

Best King Miniseries in a long time.

8/10
Author: kurtman-3 from McCook, Nebraska
31 January 2002

This was the best king miniseries since "The Stand". It wasn't horribly original but it did great work with what it was given. The characters were somewhat one note but the actors that played them were fantastic. It was creepy and full of tension. I just had one problem with this movie. I didn't like what happened to Nancy Travis's character. The actress who played the little girl was good and Emery was the best character in there. He was the most original. He was great comic relief. I give this one an 8 out of 10.

Was the above review useful to you?

Not what I expected in a Stephen King haunted house flick. Overall it was fairly disappointing.

6/10
Author: Shinitra from Baltimore, MD
31 January 2002

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I don't know what constitutes spoilers here, so just to be safe: Possible spoiler alert! I don't give away any plot points, but I do discuss certain aspects of the series and the characters that you might not know about if you haven't seen it. If you don't care...read on.

The house effects were cool, the cinematography of the house was beautifully done (the shot down the center of the stairs was my favorite). The makeup/monster effects were poorly executed. They just looked like plastic covered animatronic ghosts/zombies/whatever they were. Julian Sands was amazing, and horribly under-used. His was one of two characters that kept me watching after night one. Nancy Travis...well, I guess I can't directly blame her, but the character was poorly written. I had a hard time believing that such an insane, egomaniacle, evil woman could have convinced these people to join her, even for $5K a head. She was completely over the top and psychotic and just...that character killed a lot of my suspension of disbelief. When I heard that King and Spielberg wanted to make the ultimate haunted house movie, but had a parting of the ways. The Haunting was Spielberg's foray...well, I thought that hands down, King's vision would blow it out of the water. Unfortunately, that just wasn't the case. It was The Haunting (ie not scary, sometimes boring, poorly executed)...just 6 hours of it that I could have spent doing something more enjoyable. Still, I've seen worse (far worse) from King. Sleepwalkers anyone?

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 13 of 31: [Prev][8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history