Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

An absolute waste of money

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

A good, well written and directed film which mostly follows the plot in the book, sometimes in different orders. The children actors are good and exactly like the Dresden dolls in the book, and looked close to the age of the characters in the book. Although this could have been better as the twins were only 4 when they went in and the child actors were around 7 throughout the film, therefore not showing they aged. This could have linked to the second book/film. The film showed a good relationship between the children and how things would have been trapped in an attic for over 3 years. Some acting could be better, especially from Heather Graham. Clothes and props were good although some were too "new" for the 1950s. Not as good as the original film in my opinion, where the characters were more blond(e) and although this didn't follow the story directly it was slightly better written.

I was very impressed with this film. I came across this film by accident as I was just checking the order of the next book after starting to re read the series again and thanks to google suggestions it came up so I had to google it further. Being a big fan of the books for many years and having read them several times, I was slightly concerned the film would not live up to the books and without fail there was parts that I though should have been added or that could have been portrayed better but none the less I was still impressed with the film. A few years ago I watched the other adaptation of the book and was very disappointed as it was shocking and did not do the book any justice. But in this version I felt the actors played the parts well and I felt just as addicted to this film as I do the books and would happily watch it again.

If you watch the original, and compare both films, you will notice the 2nd film seems to have a cheaper budget, its rushed, acting is poor, and the film ambiance is not there.. its seems as though its rushed. the original has you feeling its real, a better story and more detail.. the new one is badly written, a lot of original story is missing, and the sets look like set, rather than the feeling you get from the original...the closeness to detail is missing which makes a story, the connection between bro and sister does not feel right, and if they are going to make a set, make it so its close to the original..when you watch both, i feel you will agree with me that the first film is much better.

My wife who read the book many years ago was looking forward to this film adaptation. She informs me that the film was faithful to the book.As for me I probably not the target audience for this Lifetime Original Movie. Its mainly targeted at a female audience and despite the star casting of Ellen Burstyn, it has made for TV written all over it and the largely interior sets very much displays its low budget if glossy origins.The film is about a group of four children locked in an attic in the care of their stern and wicked grandmother while their glamorous mother (Heather Graham) tries to reconcile with her father and inherit his money. Over time the two older siblings embark on an incestuous relationship and discover that there mother has abandoned them and worse they are superfluous to her new life and they plan to escape.The film is plain, old fashioned, even a tad hammy. Burstyn imbues her character with some emotions and care towards her grandchildren but in the main she is a harridan. Graham starts of as the caring mother but over time she has entered her own glamorous world and you get the feeling she cares less about her kids.The younger children play their parts well, the older children did not convince. They did not look like kids locked up in an attic, malnourished, living in a troubled existence.