The movie feels as hollow as the Winchester Mystery House itself. I can see why people find the story of Sarah Winchester’s mansion so captivating: a wealthy woman connected to the firearms industry believed she was haunted by the spirits of those killed by her family's weapons, and followed a medium’s advice to continuously build onto her home, adding or removing rooms seemingly at random. She thought building would keep her safe from harm, so construction continued until her death, after which the house opened as a tourist attraction. It’s an odd and fascinating tale that took quite some time to make it to the screen. However, the film itself isn't particularly impressive; it’s just another ghost story set in a haunted house. The Spierig Brothers, who directed and wrote the screenplay, don’t bring anything fresh to the project, relying heavily on standard American horror tropes, including sudden, startling images intended for jump scares—moments that feel fairly predictable. I've seen better haunted house movies. One of the biggest issues is a weak script and underdeveloped characters. The writers seemed so preoccupied with the mysterious house and its original owner that they failed to craft a compelling narrative around them. Things pick up when the doctor arrives at the mansion, but the events leading up to his visit—the reasons for his presence there—feel contrived. Furthermore, the melodramatic twist involving the doctor and a ghost from his past was obvious from early on and ultimately disappointing. The characters are poorly written and lack personality; they appear, speak, and then vanish without generating any real investment from the audience. And to compound matters, the script invents details about Marion Marriott, the niece and heiress of the manor owner. While she was a real person, her life wasn't as portrayed in the film, and her husband’s fate is fabricated—a pointless and unnecessary addition. The cast includes some recognizable names, but they may not be proud to be associated with this work. The performances feel lackluster, suggesting that the actors weren’t particularly engaged or motivated. Helen Mirren, despite being the most experienced and well-known actress in the film, seems distant, almost uninterested. Jason Clarke seemed to try and inject some energy into his performance, but he didn't have much opportunity to do so. The movie isn't a technical triumph either. While there were attempts to film on location at the original house, the cramped spaces and low lighting posed challenges for filming. I suspect the property’s management was hesitant about allowing extensive shooting, given their usual strict control over interior photography. The studio recreations are well-done, and I appreciated the sets and the depiction of the house itself. However, the production values largely stop there: the cinematography is unremarkable, and the editing is commonplace, though it does maintain a decent pace. The props and period details appear authentic, but the CGI is substandard; the digitally created images look cheap, and the visual and sound effects feel basic.

Source on TMDB