YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

WillSushyMedia This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

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...

dantonstl Watching this movie made me think of a small motel in Mount Shasta, California. I was a little surprised to see Juliette Lewis in this movie too.More or less I had the feeling that I was a part of this movie, mainly the scenes where snakes inhabit this newly purchased home: I can like totally recall having something to do with that, or maybe I just remember having had seenlike an HBO special regarding that sequence within the film. So that scene was more vivid than most of the movie just because the editing and narration of a possible Behind the scenes trailer made that so..or, I was actually a part of this film unknowingly when this happened. So like the rest of the narrators stated..Sharon Stone and Dennis Quaid are husband and wife that move to Bellingham from New York. I couldn't tell...I actually thought that the city might have been Chicago. and they do..they move and look into purchasing this new home with the intent of PUTTING MONEY BACK into The Community. What seems to be pretty funny is that law enforcement seems to only need to heed Stephen Dorffs' characters antics.His antics being that hes' upset that his sisters and mother are gone while his pop is in a nursing home eating chocolate cherries. So, here they are, DENNIS and SHARON. Moving in, because they bought the home and are now ready to remove previous contents as well as get it working because the pool wasn't kept up.So Stephen wanders on into the home looking at pictures of his childhood and ends up landing a job assisting the cleaning up of the pool and water pump on property.Sharon and Dennises kids don't like Stephen.Stephens girlfriend pumps gas at a local gas station. Stephen went to prison for three years because of manslaughter. At some point in time there is a vehicle found in the woods with a new York license plate.By this time there is no concrete evidence that all the weird freaky things happening that Dennis Quaid is accusing Stephen of doing is actually any of his fault...but I guess its supposed to be obvious.At one point of time a drunk Dennis Quaid messes up his vehicle by accidentally hitting a deer or goat. But the next morning there winds up a dead animal inside the pool.Its Stephens fault! that is what this movie turns out saying over and over again.

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!"

ryansassy1 Here's an example of Don't Let This Happen to You for Directors: hire competent actors, scout out a great location, spend a hefty budget on productions values, and then set about filming one of the most mediocre "horror" scripts ever written. I mean seriously man, did you even see Jeffries' resume of flotsam before you signed on for this? It reads like a homage to underachievement. At least, that's consistent with the plot for this film: A family moves away from the big city to a house in the countryside, bought at a fantastic bargain price. At first the mansion-like building seems like a dream come true, and they set out to restore it. But as each of them explores the house's obscure history, disturbing family secrets of the original owners are revealed, and the father begins to suspect that something sinister happened at Cold Creek Manor. Suspense starts to build as strange incidents happen with increasing frequency, and then... not much. The answer to the mystery turns out to be the most conspicuous and easily-guessed villain, whom we met and instantly suspected quite early in the film. Thank you, Captain Obvious Scriptwriter! Cold Creek Manor could be called Gothic "horror" in a sense -- the desolate landscapes, dilapidated old building, hidden secrets, and creepy atmosphere are all staples of Gothic-style horror. However, there is also supposed to be an element of supernatural in Gothic stories, which Cold Creek Manor lacks. It hints and teases us aplenty, but never delivers on phantoms or magical evil; and when there is opportunity for an intense climax of horror, it's as if the director shrinks back from the threshold. The end result is a letdown.I can't fault the actors, for the most part, who do their job well enough. It's just that they're given some horrible dialog, and look at what they have to work with. Dennis Quaid (our main protagonist, unfortunately)is either playing a stupid, wimpy character quite brilliantly, or he's managed to bungle a decently relatable character into something annoying. Sharon stone is alright as the wife who catches on too late to the danger they're all facing. Kristen Stewart interprets the role of the daughter as her usual hostile, sullen, emo persona-- gee, what a surprise.Tweaked a bit, daring a bit more, and perhaps rewritten, this story had so much potential to be good! Oh well, we'll never know...