Dr Jacques COULARDEAU A very strange story in this film. A story that does not look like Stephen King's traditional stories. Many things are different from what he has ever produced. Strangely enough it comes after the film "Rose Red" that is posterior in story time. This story is thus a prequel to the previously shot one. The element that is typically Kingian is the haunted house with some connection to Indians behind. But that is all. The story itself is some kind of distorted and warped "Gone with the Wind" in a setting that looks like and sounds like a Victorian house from England's 19th century, the Bronte Sisters maybe. The main character, Ellen Rimbauer herself is more like one of these feminine characters from this English literary period. Little to do with Stephen King's social approach and even historical time. There is even a vodun dimension that is more typical of Anne Rice's witches, especially the last volumes of the vampire series when the witches join the vampires in some kind of old central American chase. Yet the film is outstanding and mesmerizing in its slow rhythm and its slow building of the terror that is attached to the man of the house, to the man that has to be eliminated. But we know better, since we know the sequel that came before the prequel. It is the house that is twisted and warped and not the man who just used the house to get rid of his mistresses and then later of his own children. The question that is not answered though is why the house accepted to be the servant of that man, and what's more why the house accepted to be the justice-bringer, the executioner of the demand for vengeance and retribution from the wife. Can we interpret that as the taking over of the house by the wife and her African servant and confident? I am not sure. It is not all that clear. What's more there are so many corners in the house that are not on the blue print that we would like to know how all that is possible. Did the house build itself, or grow inside the structure that was given to it, as it is suggested at the end? Maybe. But that is original for Stephen King. In "The Shining" the evil Indian spirit is living in the hotel but the hotel is not growing. In "Salem's Lot" the vampire takes over the house that welcomes him because of the crime it hosted some time before, but once again the house itself does not grow. There are several other haunted houses in King but never a house that has the power of growing, even if the Dark Tower could be seen as such, though it is not and it is only the character that is growing through mythical and maybe mystical time as he is going up the tower. The magic comes from somewhere else, not the building itself. And in this case the evil that haunts the house is not very clear, clearly identified. Indian, Irish hence Celtic, or whatever, it is not clear at all. Some elements are not used enough or made explicit enough, like the malformation of the daughter's right arm, and her pushing the little pram around with her doll in it, a Vodun doll? Yet the film is effective in its suspense and dense atmosphere.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Spikeopath I have certainly seen bigger budgeted movies in the genre far worse than this effort, it is competently acted, has some nice visual touches, and the director knows how to best utilise the monolithic house. That said, without genuine suspense it is hard to succeed in the genre, so without a fearful story as well it has little to no chance of making it. The crux of the matter is that the story really isn't that interesting, we have seen and read about this plot on numerous occasions, so for a TV movie to win you round it really is asking way too much. Basic ingredients are all here, creepy house, pretty wife confused, servant with big role to play, and of course the genre staple of sexual deviant husband with dark overtones. The film moves along sedately which is fine if the pay off is worth the wait, sadly it isn't here and it limps over the finish line instead of leaping over as the build up had promised.Just below average for me, but a gentle round of applause for effort to those involved, 4/10.

toxiemite There is nothing in this film that isn't covered in Rose Red. Almost every scene in this film is an extended cut of the flashbacks from the first film.Rose Red was just shy of a masterpiece but unless you really really want to see for yourself, the 90 minutes spent watching this film could be used to watch something else...anything else really.Performance and visual style are excellent, but does that matter when we've seen it all before?(I am writing this to meet with IMDb's quota of lines for an individual review... 10 lines at least per comment)

chrysdtl I thought the movie was flat and insipid. The events that happen in that house - Rose Red - made me wonder and wait for a creepy if not unexpected explanation. In stead I don't really get one. The movie is not creative enough although it has a pretty good start and a lot of elements to play with. For example the origins of the black woman, the girl's handicap, the sexual behavior of the husband and the secrets of the house discovered by Ellen. To sum up I thought it was an awfully long movie that didn't say anything. I recommend you see "The others" if you're into creepy ghost stories that have a smart story line and surprise you in a pleasant way.