Is Roses Are for the Rich Worth Watching? Honest Movie Review & Audience Verdict (1987)

The Narrative Arc & Core Premise

Roses Are for the Rich, a standout production of 1987, meticulously weaves its narrative threads through the Drama, TV Movie landscape, offering a cinematic experience that is as challenging as it is rewarding. The primary thematic concern of the film is an investigation into In a small town in Appalachia, Autumn's young husband is killed in a suspicious mine explosion. As the story unfolds, we are introduced to a world where the traditional boundaries of Drama, TV Movie are tested.

The screenplay takes its time to establish the stakes, ensuring that every character motivation is grounded in a psychological reality. The synopsis only hints at the depth: "In a small town in Appalachia, Autumn's young husband is killed in a suspicious mine explosion. She vows vengeance on mine owner Douglas Osborne and dedicates her life to destroying him, even at the cost of her own happiness. When her attempts at financial ruin fail, she manipulates Osborne into marriage by claiming she is carrying his child. After Osborne dies from cyanide poisoning, Autumn is arrested for his murder, but she professes her innocence."

Artistic Execution & Performance Study

A film's resonance is often dictated by the strength of its execution, both in front of and behind the camera. In Roses Are for the Rich, we see Lisa Hartman utilizing their established screen presence to carry the story forward. It is a solid, workmanlike performance that serves the director's vision without overshadowing the larger narrative goals.

The direction by Michael Miller is marked by a steady and professional hand. From a production standpoint, the film meets the high standards of modern industrial filmmaking. The sets are well-crafted, and the visual effects are integrated with a level of polish that ensures the viewer matches the director's intended level of immersion. While perhaps not groundbreaking, the execution is flawless. The pacing, over its 182 minute runtime, allows the audience to fully inhabit the space the director has created, making the eventual resolution feel deeply earned.

Critical Assessment: Why You Should Watch

Is Roses Are for the Rich truly worth your investment of time and attention? In an era of disposable content, this film makes a strong case for its existence. If you are a connoisseur of Drama, TV Movie, then this is a highly recommended entry that delivers on its promises while offering a few surprises along the way.

The film's ability to perfectly execute its genre requirements is why it has earned its 6/10 score. It speaks to a global audience while maintaining a distinct and unique voice, a balance that is notoriously difficult to achieve in the modern marketplace.

Philosophical Subtext & Directorial Vision

At a deeper level, Roses Are for the Rich explores the dichotomy of truth and perception. The 1987 audience is increasingly sophisticated, and Michael Miller respects this by refusing to provide easy answers to the story's complex questions.

The philosophical underpinnings of the second and third acts suggest a narrative that is interested in more than just entertainment. It is an exploration of what it means to be human in an increasingly complex world.

Final Editorial Recommendation

Ultimately, Roses Are for the Rich serves as a reliable piece of entertainment that will satisfy core fans while providing a solid entry point for new viewers. Whether you are drawn to it by the star power of Lisa Hartman or the critical acclaim surrounding its release, Roses Are for the Rich is a film that demands to be seen on the largest screen possible.