When thinking about this film, several words come to mind: cliched, contrived, and confusing, to name a few. In most suspense thrillers, the audience finds itself yelling out advice to the main characters, such as "don't go into the basement- the bad guy is there" or "save yoursel
When thinking about this film, several words come to mind: cliched, contrived, and confusing, to name a few. In most suspense thrillers, the audience finds itself yelling out advice to the main characters, such as "don't go into the basement- the bad guy is there" or "save yourself! don't go back for your cat!" I never did that with this one. It wasn't because the decisions this victim makes are any smarter than any other suspense thriller victim, it was more that I just really didn't care what happened to her. I couldn't feel any sympathy for her because she was so two-dimensional.
Then let's consider the stalker. He is supposed to make the viewer feel creepy just by being onscreen. He is definitely no Anthony Hopkins or Jack Nicholson. Frankly, I've seen episodes of "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" that were creepier. I'm tired of actors who think it is easy to play a psychopath.
This film did have its bright spots, though they were few and far-between. One scene that I thought was very well-done (if slightly preposterous) took place in a church and involved a very cool priest. I can say no more.
I suppose I sometimes demand too much of made-for-TV movies. In all honesty, I'd have to say that "made-for-TV suspense Velveeta" is my favorite genre, and when viewed in its proper context (i.e. on cable at three in the morning), this film is a fine example of its genre.
