Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

MusicChat It's complicated... I really like the directing, acting and writing but, there are issues with the way it's shot that I just can't deny. As much as I love the storytelling and the fantastic performance but, there are also certain scenes that didn't need to exist.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

shannen-l-c I haven't read Stephen King's novel of the same title which this movie is based on, but can only assume it's the primary material that is responsible for this movie being such a huge dull dud. It starts with a lot of promise and I was very engaged, watching this picture perfect couple with their 'good marriage' and wondering what was going to happen to shatter their world. Unfortunately, it just didn't really seem to go anywhere and I found myself questioning every single decision that was being made and wondering what logical person would react this way. Upon Darcy's discovery that her husband is in fact a serial killer, she reacts like anyone would in the same position - with confusion, shock, disbelief, reversion and panic. However, from that point onwards I couldn't understand any of the bizarre decisions Darcy made. Why would you stay in the house? Even if her husband was away, I'd be out of that house and as far away as I could get. When her husband asked if they could forget what had happened and move on (which is perhaps one of the most disturbing and shocking scenes, I've witnesses, and a strong point of the movie), why didn't she lull him into a false sense of security and when he was out of not paying attention leave and go straight to the police? Instead, she continued to play house with a man that was clearly psychotic and had violently raped and killed multiple women, and then randomly attacked him days (or maybe weeks later). I can't understand how or why she came to the decision that killing her husband was the best resolution and I can't imagine that any sane person would immediately jump to that conclusion. At first, I wondered if we were supposed to question Darcy's morality and that King was playing with us, and actually, she was the evil one, but as the movie progressed that clearly wasn't true. Darcy was painted as being an innocent victim of her husband's crimes that did what she did because she wanted to protect her children from being tarnished by her father's crimes. It's a poor excuse and does little to justify her actions, in my opinion. Of course finding out the truth about their father's crimes would harm them for a short while, but eventually the world would forget and they'd all be able to return to normal. Resorting to murder seems too extreme and I can't wrap my mind around that. Unfortunately, the fact that I can't understand or justify Darcy's actions, means the whole movie fell flat for me. It felt unrealistic and as though it was overreaching. Having said this, the strongest part of the movie was definitely Joan Allen's performance as Darcy, which I can't fault. She carried the movie and if it wasn't for her engaging performance, I probably wouldn't have managed to watch until the end.Other than that, I'm afraid this movie did fall flat for me. I was constantly waiting for something more to happen, for a reasonable explanation as to what was happening and why, but it was never delivered. We don't even get a proper explanation as to why her husband has killed people (except for his explanation of it being a friend inside his head that takes over) and there's little insight into Darcy's thought processes. When she suddenly attacks her husband I was shocked because it felt like it came out of nowhere. It also seemed uncharacteristically sinister and evil for a woman that was supposedly 'normal'. And the one final question that plagued me is how did the police not discover that her husband's death wasn't an accident? How would he have managed to fall over the banister the way he did? They'd tell just from his position and the way he landed that he was pushed, because it would be impossible to fall that way. Furthermore, they would surely be able to tell that the cause of death was suffocation which wouldn't make sense based on the injuries he received from that fall. Overall, this movie lacks logic or reasoning. I think it had the potential to be really good, but more thought needed to be put into it, and I'm not sure if the lack of consideration is due to the directors/producers or from the original material by King. Regardless, this is a sub-par movie that I certainly wouldn't recommend to friends.

jamesharringtondes I had to check, this is the same Joan Allen as was in Bourne movies ? Goes to show: early beauty is no guarantee of later life attractiveness. Most of cast is uninspiring, movie plods like most formula movies, no one stands out as in the 'now' Cliché lines and droll setting; don't waste more than 30mins, clicker is your salvation.

davideo-2 STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning Darcy (Joan Allen) and Bob Anderson (Anthony LaPaglia) appear like the perfect married couple, with their several children all having done quite well for themselves and one even preparing to tie the knot. And Darcy has no reason to think this is anything but reality- until she learns of a spate of murders of young women around the local area and then, one night to her sheer terror, discovers Bob is the perpetrator. This explosive secret sets the pair on a devastating collision course while a frail detective (Stephen Lang) follows their trail.I always feel awkward watching a Stephen King film before I've read the novel it's sourced from, because I'd rather it was that I'd read his story first (and got the best experience) than watch the film and know what happens in the book. Ah, but if the man himself wrote the screenplay as well, even though he already wrote the book it's adapted from, then that kind of makes it better then, doesn't it? As is the case with this adaptation of a short story from one of his novellas, although how he managed to make something so challenging so short, I don't know.It's the sort of thing that could only have come from his far fetched, twisted mind, and the tone is as dark as the subject matter decrees it should be, which makes it an uneasy, unsettling journey into something that takes a dark imagination to enjoy. That said, it is also genuinely suspenseful, in that you are really unsure how it will play out or what the outcome will be. Stern, solid lead performances from Allen and LaPaglia also help, as almost the sole focus of the developing material. Some suspension of disbelief is inevitably required at times, and it doesn't ever come off as being quite as seat edge as it could have been, but it's well done enough in other aspects to gloss over this.With something so small scale, it might be harder for many to see King as his darkest, but for those that can seek this out, it's a pretty good catch. ***

mjay81010 This was a good movie. It is not what you think...if you read the movie synopsis. It definitely is Stephen King-ish. If you like movies that are interesting and keep you full of "what's next",then you'll like this movie. Some people want so much out of a movie other than entertainment. And most of these reviews sound like these people want to be movie critics but didn't make it. Plan and simple...not a bad movie at all. It starts right from the beginning. Keeps you interested all the way to the end. I, personally, have not seen a movie like this. And I watch a lot of lifetime movies. I really would like to read this book! That's how interesting the movie was to us. Good weekend movie or date movie.