Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

Dirtylogy It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

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

generationofswine Reading through, a l0ot of the hate is for Stephen King and not so much for the series itself. Mind, they are hati8ng on him for being a popular writer in the literary version of the hipster nothing mainstream ethos.And while they are doing it, they are forgetting the same hatred for the same reasons were targeted at Poe, Lovecraft, Dumas, and Sabatini...so King is in pretty good company for the haters.His problem is...he doesn't know how to end things. At least most of the time with King the pay off is the build up and that build up is really fun to read...or in this case watch.But it ends like The Stand, with a solid "meh." And the plot is very Drive-in B-Horror movie, which is fun, because, you know, they aren't trying to do Shakespeare who was also a--gasp--pop writer in his day.It's King, he does horror and some of it is EPIC, like The Shinning, The Stand, you know the names......but most of it is B-Movie fun and enjoyable on a whole different level.Rose Red is a B-Movie from the haunted house vein and it works, it makes for an enjoyable show with an enjoyable cast.The is until it tapers out in the last act, but it's long enough where that doesn't matter, we had the build-up and it was worth it.

geocapital This is a typical paranormal activity movie: The characters act like idiots, making always the worst choice (like going alone somewhere), most of the paranormal things do not happen on screen, characters die one by one (although they do stay longer in this 4-hour mini series) and you can't even understand why these characters are there in the first place, music that you would never listen by itself (it feels strange that the OST seems to have been released as a double album) and a whole stage and acting that offers more laughs than its parody could ever do. So, the story is about a mentally problematic "psychology" professor who is also a fond fan of paranormal activity. Trying to boost her career, she decides to go and collect some "hard" data (hahahaha) to prove to her boss and the psychology scientific community that paranormal activity is real. The place for that is a mansion belonging to her boyfriend and is supposed to be haunted. Because of numerous deaths, the place was left empty for many years and is considered to be sleeping... For reasons unknown, the "scientist" believes that the house will wake up thanks to a group of other paranormal crazees that she is actually paying to go to the house with her and especially a telekinetic teenager that seems to be special among the rest (we don't know why). Although each of the members seems to have a special talent (a special move if you are a gamer), they barely seem to need it as any random guy could act the same way in that house. So, this professor takes all the expensive equipment of the university (telemetric... hahaha) and goes to collect some hard data. These equipment include a camera and a machine that measures temperature (called thermometer) and how many people are in the room (and despite the number being larger than the actual people, it still doesn't make a difference in the story). After they move in and before setting the equipment, they go on a tour. Although a lot of the paranormal activity happens during this tour (like the screaming room), they don't record anything, and the prof continues the tour like nothing happened. Later on, when more paranormal things happen, the same professor who was so adamant that there is paranormal activity, appears to ignore it and get even crazier forgetting the reason she went there in the first place. Maybe at the end, we understand why... Anyway, to tell the truth, if you like this kind of movies, you will have some pleasant time, with some nice laughs when you know what is going to happen (and it does!). But it's a terribly long movie, with very slow development and these boring scenic gaps fitted for TV shows. Anyway, I'd better go change my underwear for the fifth time. Still half an hour to go.

Arirang2009 And here, ladies and gentlemen, we have The House which really likes to eat folks with pants and shoes on - i wonder if Rose Red also eats censors just as well?Through the time, Rose Red seem to have swallowing a lot of different "things", not only a nice bunch of peoples, but also loads of blurry CGI and two - believe it or not - vampires; how they got there must be a story of its own (you'll have to discover them for yourself!) At least thats the impression i got when i watched the 3 episodes. As always, i don't really have any higher expectations of Kings movie adaptions, since only four has been proved good; The Stand, Pet Cemetery, Carrie and The Cycle of a Werewolf, and they where aired and published long time ago. Rose Red has the great potential to be a nicely ghost story, or at least a mediocre one, and much in this flick are acceptable to a certain point, despite some character frustration and plot holes, such as irrational behavior and lack of cognitive thinking - if they all had some psychic telepathic ability, why did everyone failed to see the most obviously outcome in their situation and so on. The characters in a movie, are for me, the building block of the story, and the misshape of Rose Red was't really the cheaply CGI effects, nor the ridiculous looking ghosts of Ellen Rimbauer and April, which maybe unintentionally made me chuckle from time to time, it was Annie and Nick - oh man! I just wanted to kill that authentic girl - which didn't really acted authentic, and Nick, whit his heaped persona that makes the skin go goosebumps and that British accent which made my body shivering - oh man! Sorry if im lacking words for it - but "begone!" with you! Funny enough; Rose Reds antagonist among the "ghost hunting" group Emery Waterman seem to be - in the straight opposite direction of what King might had in his mind - the one with most common sense. In contrast, i had the feeling that Emery was supposed to create uncertainty within the group, hence making them weaker against Rose Reds ghosts.Rose Red itself had that suspense you might expecting from a Haunted - House movie, and it has to be said that the music with all those whispering voices must be one of the greater choices in any of Stephen Kings movies, i really liked it. The screenplay showing various parts of the house, both inside and from above, makes your imagine go wild, thoughts such as "what about if i where there...", it adds a lot to the creepiness. A lot of thing could be recognized from other movies, i don't need to mention movies such as The Haunting and The Legend of Hell House, but it still was acceptable levels of inspirations from outside; but Glenn Miller - oh man - that song playing over and over again, as if Stephen King really wasn't able to select something else! I never wanna hear that song again, and the fact that the song even appears in The Shining hurts, because its something you can watch when nothing better is to be reached a cold, dark autumn evening!Creepiness: 5 Scariness: 2 Sound/music: 5 (without Glenn Miller) Visualization: 5Thanks!

buzzerbill At his best, Stephen King has good ideas and writes excruciatingly bad prose. And even the good ideas vanish in the translation to the screen. In my experience, there are only two good movies made from King's books--Christine and The Dead Zone (The Shining is Kubrick's biggest disappointment.) Rose Red is the worst haunted house film I have ever seen, and in the top 1% of worst movies I have ever seen. Gregory, the infallible movie cat, who normally responds to bad films with a disdainful sniff and a malodorous trip to the litter box, nearly made the same comment in from of the television about 10 minutes into the second segment.Where oh where can we start? Let's start with the special effects, if only to dismiss them. Pretty as they are, they dress up a pig. And as we all should know, you can dress up a big, put lipstick on her, and call her Monique--but she is still a pig. No bad film was ever made good with special effects--and this turkey is a prime example.How about the cast? On the whole pretty good, with a couple of veterans like Judith Ivey and Julian Sands, both of whom are capable of enlivening a film. Not here.And now, the plot. Oh, the plot. What a dreadful mess. First of all, it's a mishmash of elements from far better work. The house that's alive and malignant? And the experiment with psychics? Look no further than the best of all haunted house movies, the original version of The Haunting (not the remake!). Even King used it before in The Shining. The child medium? Firestarter, and any of a dozen different films and movies. And The Haunting did more in two hours than this in well over four.And why? To begin with, everything, including the kitchen sink and all the the plumbing, has been tossed in, with decidedly ill effect. We have academic politics. We have a mad scientist in Nancy Travis's character, who is so annoying that it's a wonder that the rest of the investigators didn't roll her up in a carpet and jump up and down, up and down, crushing her like Nero did Poppea. For heaven's sake, we even have a nerd with a neurotic smothering mother--a veritable field day for Freud.And what is worse--far far worse--is that the whole preposterous farrago makes NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. Why does writing "Open the doors" 100 times open the doors? If the house is the evil entity, why does its influence extend far the house. And, for that matter, given the aerial shots of the house in the middle of downtown Seattle, where the devil is all the open space in which characters keep getting lost? And we do not get to see the house blown up at the end? A terrible cheat-perhaps the SFX budget ran out. And, to cap it all, the dialogue is written--and delivered (with a few exceptions) in a fever pitch of hysteria that heightens the overall sense of--well, confusion is perhaps the kindest word for it.Four hours on DVD, six on television with breaks. For heaven's sake, save yourself time and brain cells. Rent a good film like the original version of The Haunting or The Uninvited (Ruth Hussy, Ray Milland.) Why anyone watches this festering heap of poo is beyond me.