The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer (2003 TV Movie) User Reviews

The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer: An unexpected prequel

[Platypuschow · 5/10 · 19 February 2018]

I wasn't aware that Stephen Kings Rose Red (2002) had a prequel, upon finding out I was quite excited as the potential was really quite good.

Sadly this was not penned by Stephen King at all which I find to be a really strange decision.

It tells the story of Rose Reds construction and how it came to be. The setting, the cinematography, the writing is all quite good but feels forced.

I enjoyed Rose Red, though I don't think it was exactly ground breaking it did manage to accomplish what it set out to do. I don't think however that this does.

Though it tells a great story it gradually falls apart and when the credits rolled I was left with a frustrating number of unanswered questions.

I think perhaps it could have done with an additional 30-60 minutes to flesh it out, in it's present state it is passable but very underwhelming.

The Good:

Couple of great moments

Looks great

The Bad:

Few plot holes

Too short

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I'm anti-remakes/reboots but this and Rose Red could perhaps be considered

Disappointed

[Sylviastel · 5/10 · 16 May 2003]

I am disappointed because the film never explains the disappearances or the circumstances around Rose Red. I think it would have been better if they tried to convey the cause of the mysterious disappearance of April, Ellen, Sukeena, and anybody else who vanished for no reason. I wish Rose Red existed so we can visit but it's too far-fetched and it doesn't explain the paranormal around the house to the audience. I admired the actresses who played Ellen and Sukeena but I never did understand the relationship as a whole. I felt there were too many unanswered questions about the whole house in general. The house Rose Red mini-series should have answered what happened to the people trapped in the house whether by body or spirits. I was hoping for answers but I didn't get them.

not exactly disappointing...

[marinanenna120 · 6/10 · 9 December 2006]

This movie was certainly interesting to say the least. Although I have not seen Rose Red, i thought it was an okay movie. To clarify some of the comments that were made about this movie, The film DOES explain the disappearances of the characters indirectly. The characters that disappeared had either a close relationship to Ellen, or had something to do with her husband (who had a very large sexual appetite). Rose Red is more or less a spirit controlling the house that was quite fond of Ellen. The house grew to love Ellen. The mysterious happenings occurred so that Rose Red could get her to see that her husband was really a shaky and unfaithful character. They also occurred because the house wanted Ellen to remain fond of only Rose Red, which is why April disappeared as well. Basically, Rose Red grew jealous of Ellen's and April's relationship. Sukeena never disappeared, Ellen's husband just had her put in jail after April disappeared thinking that she was the cause.

With certain horror movies, every detail, every word should be payed attention to, otherwise you will have questions afterwards.

A Decent Prequel But Lacking Something.

[sawyertom · 13 May 2003]

The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer was supposed to be the prequel to answer some of the questions about Rose Red's history from last years mini-series. Instead, it seems like Rose Red answers more questions about The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer. The story and acting were well done and pretty easy to follow. To say the least, it does keep your interest. It starts out with the building of Rose Red and how there was a nurder the day the a young and engaged Ellen Rimbauer first lays eyes on the place. The Diary of ER was entertaining, it still left a few unanswered questions and a wanting for more. My first and perhaps biggest complaint was the fact the place and the atmosphere seemed foreboding and dark, there was not as much a supernatural element to it as Rose Red. People disappeared in it, but if I recall correctly one was a famous lady who disappeared. Instead we get to see the horrors of how much a philandering, sex addicted and possibly sypohilis infected bastard John Rimbauer was and how everybody he slept with then disappeared in the house. He was basically the worst seen being in the Rose Red mansion. The movie also came up short in that it stopped before Ellen and her faithful friend from Africa also disappeared or had something happen to them in the house. There was not the horror or even suspense element that had been in Rose Red.The house's history had been made somehow less scary than what it had been in the subsequent movie that followed it. Like, I said the movie was decent, but it left you wanting more of everything. It was lacking in detail and horror. It was a decent movie about a mysterious place and the sadness suffered by a women with a sex addicted and philandering husband but little else. A little more hooror and suspense, not to mention detail would have been nice.

A Huge Disappointment

[claudio_carvalho · 5/10 · 7 July 2020]

"The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer" is a prequel to the Mini-Series "Rose Red" (2002). The cinematography and the art direction are excellent, depicting Seattle in 1910 and a few years after. The cast is also great with good performances. However, the story is weak and disclosed in a very slow pace. The great mystery of the disappearances of women is never explained and there is no explanation about the evil entity that torments Ellen Rimbauer. In the end, "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer" is a huge disappointment and never satisfies fans of horror, thriller, drama and romance genres. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): "O Diário de Ellen Rimbauer" ("The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer")

Stylish, handsomely produced thriller using Stephen King characters...

[Doylenf · 6/10 · 18 January 2009]

Using the Stephen King characters from "Rose Red," THE DIARY OF ELLEN RIMBAUER is a prequel to that little saga of a monstrous house that seems to be devouring its victims.

This version of the Rose Red story is handsomely photographed and well acted but suffers from a script that never really bothers to explain anything. The viewer is left pondering plot details up until the very end, when again there is a letdown of even more ambiguity.

Nevertheless, it manages to impress with the performances, the settings, the costumes and the plot itself is a mixed bag of so many thrillers from the past, even including the more genteel JANE EYRE or any of the Victorian novels that dealt with a house of dark decay and a sinister leading man.

STEVEN BRAND is the darkly handsome head of the household whose soul is corrupted by carnal desires, an unfaithful man who brings his bride LISA BRENNER to live in Rose Red, where she is gradually subjected to all sorts of vague fears and terrors and things that go bump in the night.

It's really silly stuff, not to be taken seriously, but does give rise to some goosebumps once in awhile. Eventually, the murky plot just gets muddier and all of the elements mesh into one big, slow-paced thriller that is efficient enough to produce a few chills but too ambiguous for its own good.

A little style but ultimately it's a flat experience.

[hitchcockthelegend · 4/10 · 4 March 2008]

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.

Better than Rose Red

[jklein8787 · 7/10 · 13 May 2003]

Being that Stephen King had something to do with this prequel to the horrible Rose Red, I was hesitant. But I sat down and decided to watch. Wow. What a good little ghost story. Not bad at all. A few spooky scenes, the acting was solid, and the crappy CGI effects were kept to a minimum. Very enjoyable. Reminded me of the film The Others.

Failure.

[RhymesWithBlinvy · 3/10 · 12 May 2003]

This movie fails to capture any bit of the mystery and intrigue of the best selling book it was based upon. The acting was bland, the effects unappealing and the story uninteresting. I found myself flipping through the channels I was so bored with it. It's a shame the movie turned out so bad because the book was so wonderfully done that I found myself believing that Ellen Rimbauer actually existed and wrote those words herself. The movie did not capture Ellen's innocence and naiveness when she first entered into John's life nor her gradual descent into insanity. My advice is to pass seeing this and go read the book.

A much better film than Rose Red.

[Vivekmaru45 · 6/10 · 21 April 2010]

This film describes the events chronicled by Ellen Rimbauer the wife of John Rimbauer. John who is shown in the film as a man who indulged in sexual excess and numerous affairs with women before and after marriage to Ellen. John gifts the mansion Rose Red to Ellen after a safari to Africa where Ellen falls prey to a mysterious ailment. When in Africa she befriends an African woman called Sukeena who she brings back with her. After settling in the mansion a series of bizarre disappearances occur, and it seems that the mansion is possessed by a malevolent spirit. Ellen is advise by her friend to consult a medium called Madame Lu. Madame Lu is actually a fraud and is wanted by the police. A bizarre and genuine manifestation occurs however during one of the seances.

The suspense in the film is excellent and builds up gradually. John is portrayed by a handsome Steven Brand and Ellen by beautiful Lisa Brenner. Sukeena is portrayed by excellent actress Tsidii Le Loka.

The sexual scenes in the film are intense and (while not too revealing) erotic. This film is therefore not for viewers below 18.

Beautiful flawless direction by Craig R. Baxley and overall a better film and prequel to Rose red.

Its CRAP-tastic

[dbaleckaitis · 2/10 · 6 September 2004]

Do not bother; the wifey made me watch. I had nightmares from the horrible plot which never develops; just rent these movies instead:

Poltergeist, Burnt Offerings, House.

The acting is OK at best, maybe more believable if there was some background to work with, but NOT.

Even though its made for TV I have to say they should have done much better.

The cast, location and props are well done but without character development and a plot with background information... It kills this movie in it tracks. Two words, Keep away

A "creepy" movie, not a horror flick.

[mellyjc · 9/10 · 10 November 2003]

The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer definitely held my interest enough and made me curious to see Rose Red. In my opinion, Ellen Rimbauer was the better of the two.

I loved the historical aspect of the movie, giving a definite history and personality to the house than a typical haunted house movie does. It was unique and realistic in this way, perhaps one of the reasons I preferred it to "Rose Red".

This movie contains much more mystery than "Rose Red" and is much less typical. Don't go into it expecting a regular horror/thriller movie, because that's not what it is. It's a great movie to make you think and wonder about the house, and does no more than insinuate answers, which leaves you in the mood, thinking, and drawing your own conclusions to the story, which I find much more satisfying.

Left me dreaming about the Winchester Mystery House. Believable, unique and thought-provoking. 8.5/10.

I, frankly, do not understand the confusion

[FiendishDramaturgy · 6/10 · 23 January 2005]

Ellen Rimbauer's Diary clearly explains that there were Native American workers, an accident, a subsequent curse, and so the ground is soured as in the Mic Mac burial grounds in Stephen King's Pet Sematary. It also pointedly states that because of John Rimbauer's "sins," atonement had to be made.

"Build me to the heavens" was the house's price for that atonement.

That the deaths started before the house was ever completed further substantiates the sour ground theory. The subsequent disappearances were a direct result of Ellen's bargain with the house (and the ground upon which it lay), as these victims were taken and used as builders from "the other side." The house had two distinct sides; one that was here and one which was on the other side of the veil. Those victims built from that side, as Ellen's contractors built on this side, thereby giving the house the ability to morph itself by changing hallways, floor levels, etc. by manipulating the lay of the Veil. That idea was further explained in the actual movie, "Rose Red" when you see Emory's mother coming at him through the mirror. Mirrors are oftentimes used as portals; gateways through the Veil.

I did, however, have issues with this supplemental in that the movie goes out of its way to plainly document the passing of Rimbauer's partner, Posey. He passed Adam the Tom Nix hat and threw a rose to April who caught it before he hangs himself. In this work, however, those poignant details are forgotten, as if the actual body of work which this supplements was negatable. I realize that for some critics, that is true, but for a work which supports another, that is unforgivable.

Of all the discrepancies and continuity errors to be found between the two works, those two details stand out the most, and pretty much kill the atmosphere built by the work. Otherwise, I found this quite informative, beautifully done, and praise-worthy considering what it attempts to do.

Unfortunately, it didn't quite live up to its own expectations and thereby disappointed the fans who needed this necessary back-story to feel a kinship with the house and the story that is "Rose Red."

It rates a 6.4/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Quite the letdown

[mimidicious · 5/10 · 26 November 2022]

Unfortunately, this movie wasn't up to par. They had so much information to go ahead and create the movie behind the infamous Rose Red mansion.

Admittedly, I was quite pleasantly surprised by the location and Sukeena being the same as the mini series. That's also the only part... why use different characters- but one? I wonder...

They used a couple of scenes from the original series, which was promising but let down on Posey not hanging himself in front of the kids. I mean, I get it, it's a lot darker, by then again, it's a horror... why change from something that was outed in such detail in the series?! No rose & hat throw, bummer.

Also, the movie felt very shallow. Things that could've gone in much deeper detail.

• The honeymoon felt rushed.

• Sukeena's punishment was not even mentioned.

• The extensions on the house were hardly named; except for the tower, that was, somehow, magically half-way done within what.... a day??

• No scary ghost stuff.

• No tension-building
• No horror, just some sawdust and whispers.

I would've loved more back story on John and Posey- more than just a threat because Posey was gay. Also, one important sentence was missing from the film: "Rose Red isn't finished until you say it is."

The movie tried hard, but man... even with loads of background info, it fell short and definitely did not age well.

Go watch Rose Red, instead!

Sometimes, sequels are WAY BETTER than their originals.

[Carycomic · 13 May 2003]

This definitely qualifies as one of them. Twice as good as the mini-series, and only one-third the length! Good period detail. Suitably creepy all the way through. I give it four stars, to the original's two-and-a-quarter!

...an awfully long movie that had nothing to say

[chrysdtl · 3/10 · 18 April 2005]

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.

A necessary prequel to a not so great miniseries.

[Anonymous_Maxine · 7/10 · 25 February 2004]

I saw Rose Red not too long ago, and not too long after having read the book. I went to Spain in the Summer of 2003 for a few weeks. I was traveling on my own, making a documentary for the University of California, and literally on my last day in Spain, I noticed a book called My Life at Rose Red, by Stephen King, at a liquor store in a town called Benidorm on the southeastern coast. I picked it up, since I had about 30 hours of travel ahead of me back to California and because I hadn't seen a book in English in quite some time. Having been a Stephen King fan for most of my life (I opened the floodgates of horror novels when I read `It' in 6th grade), I was amazed at how much of a character study the book was, but the movie dealt with the mystery of the haunted Rose Red, not with it's construction, which is what the book is all about. The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer, I think, makes an honest attempt to go back and tell that part of the Rose Red story.

What is truly odd, however, is that the movie that actually tells the story of Ellen and John Rimbauer, the story of the construction of Rose Red, about which Stephen Kings' book is written, is actually based on a journal of Ellen's that was written by a different author. I hope I have my facts straight here. King's book is actually in the form of Ellen's diary, although he delves suspiciously close to novel writing at many times. Who writes a diary like that? Anyway, this film telling the story that led up to the subject of the lengthy miniseries aired on ABC a couple years ago comes much closer to telling the story in the book from which that miniseries took its name. Its interesting that the miniseries needs a prequel to tell the story of the book upon which it is based.

Okay, I'm getting a little repetitive. Much more digestible at less than half the length of Rose Red, the movie unfortunately never really comes out of the shadow of the movie that its content precedes, always coming across as a prequel that leads up to something else. Maybe it's because it didn't have enough life of its own or because I always got the feeling that it was purposely covering the holes left by Rose Red, providing an excuse for that movie having so little to do with the book upon which it was supposedly based. Either way, taken together the two movies provide a pretty interesting ghost story, one about a haunted mansion that actually has such a turbulent past leading to why it is haunted (hence the need for this prequel). It's just too bad that it takes a total of more than six hours for them to tell that story

Seen it!

[toxiemite · 2/10 · 21 July 2005]

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)

Totally Missed Opportunity

[jeremy-david-kuehnau · 2/10 · 8 August 2016]

So the Diary of Ellen Rimbauer was a supplemental book done after Stephen King's Rose Red aired.

Now, I never read the Diary of Ellen Rimbauer, but I did watch the TV movie they produced, which was based on that book. And frankly, I can't see how they could ever justify the book or the movie existing.

The movie is just basically a re-hashed story of Ellen Rimbauer's history with the house and her lousy husband. At no point during the movie do they actually ever explain more than what Rose Red already established.

It doesn't explain the hauntings, or the disappearances or anything like that. To add further insult to injury, they couldn't even get the original cast member from Rose Red to play Ellen in the Diary of Ellen Rimbauer.

The movie also contradicts Rose Red in a few instances, which is honestly insane. When you are basing creative writing off of an already established world, how hard is it to keep facts straight? No wonder I haven't heard of this film until just recently, it's poo.

Bad. Real Bad.

[arfdawg-1 · 1/10 · 13 September 2020]

Dismal movie.

Horribly directed.

Really poorly acted.

It drags on with no suspense whatsoever.

I was bored out of my mind.

Frankly, I don't believe this was ever in teh theatres. It's directed like a really bad Lifetime TV movie.

Mysterious because not explicit enough

[Dr_Coulardeau · 9/10 · 22 October 2008]

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

Probably only interesting to those that have seen Rose Red

[Harlekwin_UK · 5/10 · 7 September 2023]

How did Ellen Rimbauer end up haunting the Rose Red mansion?

At the turn of the 20th century an oil baron builds a huge mansion for his new bride. But what secrets lie in its creation and what terrors are await the young woman as she lives out her life in Rose Red?

Although included in the Stephen King Collection the story is actually written by Ridley Pearson for both printed and broadcast media. Technically, the film is based on the characters created by Stephen King.

The shorter format, just 85 minutes, allows the story to move more fluidly but as a result perhaps more is left to the audience to decipher. The purpose and motive of Rose Red are there, if you look hard enough. It is a direct prequel of Rose Red, both as an explanation for/of the research by Professor Reardon and the actual events many years before.

Things to look out for: wonderful sets and atmosphere, a house playing with the minds of those around them, understated (as required) performance of Lisa Brenner

Rating: interesting to those that have seen Rose Red, ok.

a formula suspense flick

[bbbl67 · 2 June 2004]

I haven't seen the original Rose Red yet, but I did pick up this dvd at the rental store. It was decently acted, had appropriately scary mood music, in other words everything you needed to make a good horror flick. Well apart from heart that is. It just seemed to me like they just weren't trying too hard to make this thing work. It did scare you in various places, but it was almost formulaic scariness. I'd pass on this, unless you've seen Rose Red and wanted to see it's history.

I'll possibly pick up Rose Red at the video store one of these days, or maybe not -- just wasn't compelling enough from this prequel. I'll give it a 6 out of 10.

Cashing in on King

[mrveryscaryguy · 1/10 · 24 September 2023]

Greetings and welcome to my swamp shack I'm Dr. Doc Dread (not a real doctor), a master of both time and space and a huge fan of horror movies. Come in , come in. I don't get many visitors here. Watch your step those power cords are high voltage. They are part of my experiments on dimensional travel. Pull up a chair and let me tell you about a movie I just watched "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer".

What do you mean you never heard of it! You do know who Stephen King is?

His book sales are over 400 million and many have been made into films. Unfortunately some of those films just don't... but I digress. I was telling you about "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer". If you haven't seen it yet you may want to first watch the TV miniseries "Rose Red".

"Rose Red" the miniseries was based on a novel by King. After King published "Rose Red" Ridley Pearson published a prequel to "Rose Red" titled "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer : My Life at Rose Red". To be completely honest I didn't read it...but, I did watch the movie. Let me set this up a little for you. John Rimbauer (played by Steven Brand) is a filthy rich tycoon. John meets Ellen ( played by Lisa Brenner) and sweeps her off her feet. John is dashing, exciting and very very wealthy. Did I say he is also a sexual psychopath?

Ellen was too busy looking at the diamond engagement ring and the mansion named Rose Red to notice the missing girls that John was fond of visiting.

A little about the movie. Mechanically the movie was fine. It was shot well with interesting angles and edited into a coherent story. First airing in May of 2003 on ABC. Sweep week is in May and the major networks all attempted to draw huge numbers of viewers. The network with the highest rating (number of viewers) could then use those numbers to attract advertisers and determine the cost of advertising. Rose Red (the miniseries) and the King name was a huge success and ABC was hoping to capitalize again, but spent a significantly smaller amount of money.

The result "The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer: My Life At Rose Red".

(Without warning a fuzzy, white child sized critter bounds into the laboratory!) "Doc! Hey Doc! Hey Doc, do you want to hear a joke?" It interrupts enthusiastically.

Please forgive Bucky he is my creation and cohost on my show. What is he you ask? He is a "Ratbit" a rat rabbit hybrid with some human DNA thrown in. I was tampering with the laws of nature... it was a passing phase.

Bucky we have a guest. Go ahead tell us a joke.

"Why was the astronaut's diary blank?" Bucky asks his eyes wide and mouth agape in anticipation of delivering the punchline. He pauses timing is everything with comedy.

"It was filled with space." (He laughs at his own joke and bounces out of the lab as quickly as he entered.) I'm sorry about that. Unfortunately that isn't the only thing I'm sorry about. I'm sorry I'm about to give my opinion of "The Diary..." yada yada yada. I was disappointed basically that's my review. "Rose Red" was a decent ghost story reminiscent of "The Legend of Hell House" 1973 and similar to "The Evil" 1978 and let's not forget "The Haunting" 1963. "The Diary..." was more like a gothic romance with tragic themes, characters and consequences. Movies based on Stephen King's epic novels and his short stories are notorious for falling short of the base material. Though I didn't read "The Diary..." and though it wasn't written by The Master of Modern Horror my opinion is it falls short of actually being a horror movie. Thus I was disappointed. There was atmosphere and the players were adequate the sets were believable. There was even a valuable life lesson, don't marry for money. This movie may be better suited for a cable network known for appealing to female viewers than a network know for horror movies.

Dumb.

[kb-62551 · 2/10 · 27 December 2019]

It doesn't really need more adjectives than that. Fails to capture any historical accuracy, set or vernacular. Wooden, bland acting with a daytime soap opera script. Someone is supposed to be a hero or good guy in this but it's just another exciting as oatmeal flick.

I see too many reviewers asking about the house. Google exists. Well, it's Thornhill Castle in Seattle. Well, properly, Lakewood. Yes, it really was dismantled in England and sent here as the ultimate display of love from a man to his bride. Obviously, a very popular wedding venue. Yes, the "Rose Red" mini series was filmed there. Yes, it's lovely. It has a website. Now go look.