Steineded
How sad is this?
StyleSk8r
At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.
Ella-May O'Brien
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
Leofwine_draca
Back on its release in 2003, I remember thinking that COLD CREEK MANOR was yet another spooky supernatural flick about a family moving into an old home and being terrorised by its ghostly inhabitants – I imagined something like the diabolical remake of THE HAUNTING. Suffice to say, I never bothered watching it. Seeing it on television the other night, I decided to give it a chance – and I admit I had nothing better to do at the time.I was surprised. Not because this film was any good – it's not, it's just as bland and predictable as I'd feared – but because there's no supernatural stuff going on here whatsoever. Instead this is a pure psycho-thriller, harking back to those early '90s days when the likes of THE HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE had audiences sitting on the edges of their seats as normal families were terrorised by crazies. The problem with COLD CREEK MANOR is that it's just plain boring.I didn't even go in wanting or expecting originality – so when I saw there was none, I wasn't disappointed. Some effective shocks and scares would have helped, but instead we get one or two silly moments, like the laughable 'snakes in the house' interlude which comes off like some lukewarm attempt to mimic ARACHNOPHOBIA. The script is mundane, dragging the straightforward, no-twists-here plot line out to what feels like an unbelievable length, and it's one of those films that had my mind wandering and my eyelids struggling to remain raised, especially in the second half.The film's biggest problem is the acting. Dennis Quaid, an actor seemingly stuck in a 'mundane' bracket since the 1980s, has a Harrison Ford haircut and that's all you'll notice. He's bland, dull, an utterly unlikable leading man – I was hoping something unpleasant would happen to him, but it never does. Sharon Stone doesn't seem to be putting much effort in playing Quaid's wife, and none of the supporting cast members stand out – Juliette Lewis is here, typecast as 'kooky' as per usual, while Stephen Dorff seems to be trying to channel Billy Zane's personality in DEAD CALM but he comes across as a laughable, non-threatening villain.Some bloodshed, some decent shocks and some atmosphere could have made this cheesy, scary or worthwhile. It has none of those elements, content instead to rehash the same old ideas, leaving plot holes wide enough for a 4x4 to drive through and generally being a pain in the backside. They could have had fun with this premise, but the po-faced seriousness of it all makes it a stifling watch. Leave it well alone...
Rodrigo Borges
I am not used to horror thriller films and only watched it because it was starting on TV the moment I sat on the couch. It is rather good, a good surprise, and I'm used to watch Bergman, Godard, Hitchcock, Kubrick, etc... not that that matters.Everyone seemed to get the idea from the trailer that something supernatural was going to happen, I didn't get that idea.The scenarios and the props were realistic, didn't had bad camera angles, no major or noticeable flaws, one particular shot of a window was actually very good. The dialog wasn't bad. The psychological behaviors, actions and reactions give the proximity of the real emotions one must feel under serious pressure and fear. The personalities of the secondary characters correspond to those of cliché movie personalities, the kind that are really uncommon in real life and very common in other movies, so that's a down point. Another down point is the focus on the dark figure of Dale as soon as he appears, I think it is real, it is there, his psychotic personality is there from the beginning if one is paying attention but it shouldn't have been mystified. That way it would give the thinking viewer the realization that everyone can be a murderer or a crazy person.Some say there is meant to be a connection, a spark so to speak, between Dale and Leah and it is not well portrayed. Wrong! Dave gives her the sweet talk, the concern and the attention, he gives her dirty looks. She on the other way is completely innocent on account to her guilty conscience on saying yes to sleeping with her boss but never actually doing it and realizing she loves her family.It was surprisingly good and it left me tied to my chair. Some said the not having the supernatural haunted house factor took the scary part away. I think the fact that it might actually happen makes it more scary.
Dennis Littrell
This is a particularly egregious example of a Hollywood genre I call "The House from Hell." Upwardly mobile yuppie couple with two semi-adorable kids escape from the city to the country. They buy a big old beautiful house in need of some repairs. They will have a lot of fun fixing it up, the kids will be away from the bad influences and dangers of the city. They will share joyous years together and live happily ever after.Not.Actually this film has some redeeming qualities, but the hackneyed plot and the very annoying endless stupidity on the part of the yuppie couple (Dennis Quaid and Sharon Stone) in the face of the behavior of the obviously up-to-no-good psychopathic villain (Stephen Dorff) made me disremember them.Bottom line: you have better things to do with your time.--Dennis Littrell, author of "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!"
stevenkellyrn
Wow. Never in my life have I watched a movie so bad in my entire life. It was more than bad, actually. It was excruciatingly bad. Words that will come to mind when I hear of this movie shall be: boring, bad, wtf, bad, horrible, long, chocolate cherries.I've never really taken the time to review a movie on IMDb, so this is my first one. Why haven't I ever reviewed? Well if I like a movie, I'll simply give it a good rating. Usually, the reviews by other people match how I feel. Same goes for it I don't like the movie. But I am writing this to someone else who might make the same mistake as me and see a positive review telling one to ignore the negative reviews and claim that it's "not that bad". Folks, it is! DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME.Horrible acting, horrible script/storyline, BORING atmosphere, no tension. D'you know what it's like? It's like 'I Know What You Did Last Summer' gone wrong (and I wasn't so keen on that movie). Yeah, instead of 4 teenagers, how about 4 members of a family! And instead of knocking a guy over with a car, how about you buy his house? Enter psycho who wants to cause a disturbance and kill and voilà you have 'Cold Creek Manor'.The movie took FOREVER to get into it. And even at that, it didn't 'get into it' per se. A showdown to be exact. Nothing new or exciting there. Now I'm not slating this film for being unoriginal, but seriously. We've seen this type of stuff before in much better films!All in all guys, there is nothing to see here. Honestly, move along and find yourself a better movie. It will save two hours of your life. A very long two hours...2/10
