Cool News
ShawnF also derides WHAT LIES BENEATH
Hey folks, Harry here in Austin with yet another hateful review of WHAT LIES BENEATH. And again, it takes it easier on the film that Moriarty does. What is stunning is the sudden complete lack of momentum this film has going into it's week of release... in direct contrast to what happened with X-MEN. As the release came closer... the reviews flowered forth... because that movie kicked ass. I'm going into WHAT LIES BENEATH with low low llllooooowwwwww expectations... and hope for the best... I simply can't stay away from a Michelle, Harrison and Zemeckis flick... no matter how many flashing lights signal an impending train wreck. I must see it to believe it.
WHAT LIES BENEATH (DREAMWORKS PICTURES. 130 MIN.)-*1/2
Starring Harrison Ford, Michelle Pfeiffer, Diana Scarwid, Joe Morton, James
Remar, Miranda Otto and Amber Valletta.
Screenplay by Clark Gregg based on a story by Sarah Kernochan and Clark
Gregg.
Directed by Robert Zemeckis.
The scariest thing about the new horror film What Lies Beneath is how much
talent has gone to waste on screen. Directed by the otherwise reliable
Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump, Contact, Who Framed Roger Rabbit) and
starring Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer, the movie confuses slow pacing
for suspense, and predictability for storytelling. The end result is a movie
that has one great scare, a mushroom cloud of déjà vu and an overall waste
of time.
Ford and Pfeiffer play, respectively, Norman and Claire Spencer. They’re a
happily married couple that lives in a beautiful lakeside home in Vermont.
She’s a retired musician and he’s a genetics researcher living his father’s
shadow. When we meet them, they are saying goodbye to Claire’s daughter from
a previous marriage as she heads off to college, leaving just her and Norman
in the house (with her husband at work quite a bit, it’s pretty much her
alone).
Well, sort of. As soon as her daughter is out of the house (and the
picture), strange occurrences begin to happen. Claire begins hearing noises
and seeing some pretty terrifying (at least to her, not this viewer)
visions. A lengthy bout of these otherworldly encounters first leads her to
the place most of us would hopefully wind up: at the shrink’s office (said
psychiatrist is played here by Joe Morton). Claire believes that these
events are connected to Mary Feur (Miranda Otto), the wife of the new couple
who has moved in next door. After a few weeks of seeing her and her husband
Warren (James Remar) fighting, she has mysteriously vanished, and Claire
feels that she has been murdered and her spirit has returned.
That, however, is not the case. Mary is indeed alive and well, and the
disturbances in Claire’s house (that always seem to happen when Norman is
not home) have escalated. Claire soon discovers that the unearthly visitor
is connected to a missing college student who disappeared around the same
time of Claire’s auto accident and that Norman was having an affair with
this particular student. This does not bode well for a fun time at the
Spencer’s household.
It doesn’t really bode well for a fun time at the movies for you or I,
either. While the film is nice to look at (thanks to Don Burgess’ handsome
widescreen photography), Robert Zemeckis’ directing drains the film of any
life the film has. This is particularly distressing considering that this is
the same man who crafted such solid crowd-pleasers as Romancing The Stone,
Who Framed Roger Rabbit and of course, Forrest Gump. He showed real
innovation and imagination in creating worlds of wonder and fun. Here, all
he seems to be doing is ripping off Alfred Hitchcock, with the first hour
being nothing more than a Rear Window clone that serves as a red herring the
size of the shark in Jaws. Someone should tell him that Brian DePalma has
already mined that territory dry (and if he knows when to leave something
alone, we should all follow suit).
He also seems to be a bit confused when it comes to properly applying
suspense to a story. Believing that a slow moving camera will build tension,
Zemeckis instead winds up dragging out what should have been a 100-minute
movie into a protracted 130-minute endurance test, draining the last
remaining stands of life out of his story. His over abundant use of sound
effects to make the audience jump works for about five to ten minutes in the
start of the film, but after a while they become so commonplace that they
become as predictable as the last act of the film.
That predictability is more the fault of the screenplay by Clark Gregg,
which is a sad mix of different horror and suspense film elements and
paper-thin characters that we could care less about. Claire, the central
character, is never given a chance to develop. In the first act, she’s a
nosy neighbor. The second act, a disturbed Nancy Drew and the third, she
becomes The Victim, all the while suffering from otherworldly scares and
noises. Yawn. As for Norman, he’s not even around for most of the film until
the latter half and when it is revealed what his role is in all of these
proceedings (aside from his screwing a student), it is less of a surprise
for the viewer as it is an example of last-minute rewriting in order to
accommodate a big-name star who has taken on the role.
Sadly, those big stars can’t do much to bring those characters to life. Ford
tries his best, and has some fun in the last act (some, not a lot), but it
really doesn’t add up to much. It really is sad to see Ford stuck in such a
rut of mediocre (Sabrina) to downright god awful (Random Hearts, The Devil’s
Own) films over the past six years (his last all around good film: 1994’s
Clear and Present Danger), and this didn’t help matters any. I wish I could
be one of the many in film geek land who would cry out “Do Indiana Jones
4!!!!” but since I thought that series was running on fumes after its first
film, perhaps it is time for Harry to take some time off and relax (or just
pop in on Late Night With David Letterman from time to time. He’s really
funny when he shows up there).
As for Pfeiffer, I have to admit that I have never been one of her biggest
fans. I enjoyed her work in Scarface, The Witches Of Eastwick and Batman
Returns, where she stole the film as Catwoman. But, in the majority of her
work, she seems to be playing, well, herself. Her performances come off as
pedestrian, rarely coming to any life outside her public persona. Here, her
facial expression seems to be stuck somewhere between bursting out crying
and being in utter pain. Hmmm. I guess she could feel what I was going
through watching the film.
There are a lot of scary things to be seen out there this summer. The
hairstyle of failed comeback diva Diana Ross, the teeth on a person who
smokes a lot, the stuff you may find under your bed or some of the folks who
populate South Boston. Any of these sights are scarier than anything you
will see in What Lies Beneath, except the expanding bald spot on the top of
Harrison Ford’s head after he dives into the water. Han Solo, say it isn’t
so! (PG-13)
-ShawnF.
-
+ Expand All
-
Jul 17, 2000 8:06:31 AM CDT
I can just imagine the conversation between Ford and Pfeiffer on
by phreeform
He says, "My first movie was American Graffiti." She says, "My first movie was Grease 2." He says, "My second movie was Star Wars." She says, "Go to Hell."
-
I really do not understand the public outcry regarding Ford's choice of safe, middlebrow roles. Not that I support the gfare that he does select, mind you, but of all the actors to get worked about, Ford would be near the bottom of my list. In his entire career, he has never really distinguished himself as an actor of range. He is often wooden (Sabrina, Frantic, Presumed Innocent, Random Hearts) and even when he is effective, it is usually as the same type of character- emotionally cool, morally righteous, iconoclastic. I mean, can you picture Ford as an out-and-out bad guy? I can't. He is inimitable at what he does, but the man simply does not have the breadth. He really is a journeyman actor who happens to be the biggest box-office star of all-time. If we are going to be up in arms about the poor choices of a great actor, let's begin with Nicolas Cage. Oh, and I'm first!
-
In every role I've ever seen Harrison Ford play, he gets in there and gets the job done. Nothing fancy, nothing ostentatious, just straightforwardly being the character. I'm rarely conscious of the fact that I'm watching him acting, which is ultimately all I think we can ask for in terms of a performance. On the other hand, in terms of his choice of roles, he does have a tendency to play the dour hero again and again. **What Lies Beneath MAJOR FREAKIN' SPOILER Ahead (You were warned)** Notable exceptions to this "playing it safe" acting choice rule include Mosquito Coast and perhaps the movie under discussion, What Lies Beneath, where he is responsible for not only killing his mistress, but trying to kill Michelle Pfeifer too. Yet we don't find this out until the end, and he probably plays the usual convincingly dour Harrison Ford until we find out. (I haven't seen the movie, I've just read the spoilers). Perhaps Zemekis chose Ford for precisely this reason: We'd all be reluctant to believe that Jack Ryan could do such a thing. ***END SPOILERS*** Part of me would like to see this movie regardless of the bad reviews, and more than likely, I'll just wait to catch it on video.
-
I saw the movie last week and really enjoyed it. I thought Zemekis did a great job, as well as both leads in this movie. I had read a few of these negative reviews before going into the movie, and wasn't expecting much. I was really suprised by how good it was. My advice to you is: GO SEE THIS MOVIE AND MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND ABOUT THE FILM.
-
Jul 17, 2000 9:26:26 AM CDT
Sad thing is, this film is the "Double Jeopardy" of 2000...
by el duderino
In other words, this film will get bombasted critically, yet it will do tremendously well financially. This is your basic "Julia Roberts style" film in that no matter how bad the reviews are or how bad it looks people will see it just because it has Julia Roberts in it (or in this case, Michelle Pfeiffer).Will I see this? Who knows... probably not. I didn't really expect to see Scary Movie either though, and I saw that at 2:00 opening day in a crowded audience. Yet in the trailer for Scary Movie the main twists weren't already given away, like what appears to have happened in the What Lies Beneath trailer. Believe me, this film is going to do very well, but it will get slaughtered critically (if that makes a damn or not).
-
Jul 17, 2000 12:50:45 PM CDT
Dreamworks had a little haunted house movie come out this weeken
by yoshue
...called THE HAUNTING. And if this movie is as good as THAT one, I'll pass!
-
Take a remedial grammar class ro something, jeez!! It's not that hard! "It's" is a conraction of "it is." "Its" is possessive. You have an uncanny ability to consistently use the wrong one!
-
Say what you will about the film, Michelle Pfeiffer is an incredible actress, and I will be in that cinema on opening day primarily because of her.
To quote Total Film magazine, Michelle 'is quite simply one of the most beautiful and talented actresses of this or any other generation.'
Just to set the record straight, Michelle Pfeiffer is too versatile to be compared with Ms Roberts, and her films do not have the same Box Office pull, unfortunately.
-
Jul 17, 2000 1:58:11 PM CDT
And while we're on the subject of bad or one-note actors . . .
by darthslater
. . . why does it seem like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't think that Denzel Washington is such hot shit? EVERY character that he plays is a morally righteous man fighting for justice or the truth in the face unfair odds. When he DOES branch out of his little safety net, the results aren't good. (He was shitty in The Preacher's Wife as a romantic comedy hero, and although I liked "Fallen", he sleepwalked through the entire goddamn thing.) Yet every critic in the world seems lined up to suck his dick. I can think of loads of other actors who essentially play the same character in all of their movies--Nic Cage, Pauly Shore (snicker), Christian Slater, and yes, Harrison Ford. Why, then, is Washington considered one of The Greats? Huh? Why? "I asked you a question, motherfucker! Answer me, motherfucker!!!"--Big Top Pee-Wee
-
Jul 17, 2000 3:29:09 PM CDT
I told you guys a week ago this was a Klunker!! Guess I'm now i
by bari umenema
-
Jul 17, 2000 3:42:59 PM CDT
Guys, SKubrick is just 15-years-old, what the hell does he know?
by bari umenema
-
Just for the record Harrison Ford was in The Conversation (1974) before Star Wars Not to take away from the very funny goto hell joke. Just a film geekism I couldn't let go.
-
Why this movie is going to stink the hell out of the theaters and A-bomb at the box office. 1.They started advertizing too early. People are already forgetting about this movie. 2. zemekis doesn't know the meaning of restrained most days of the week. 3. Old Harrison can't play powerful or suspicious or anything other than "I'm about to take a shit, and there's no bathroom in sight so i'm just going to stand here and hold it as best I can." Hence the furrowed brow. 4. they gave too much away in the trailers, so everyone knows what's going on from the word go or will figure it out by the 3rd reel. just some thoughts.
-
Sorry, but anyone who talks about Michelle Pfeiffer movies and mentions Scarface and The Witches of Eastwick and not The Fabulous Baker Boys (and Pfeiffer's rendition of "Making Whoopee")hasn't seen her best.
-
Jul 18, 2000 1:00:03 AM CDT
Isidore you're forgetting Ford was also in Apocalypse Now, "With
by bari umenema
-
Apocalypse came out in 1979 after Star Wars so I was right not to include it; however, if memory serves, it started filming in '76 so using that logic you could be right to lambast me Mr. Um...enema. But then one must ask the question to what end would this little discussion lead? I think it would just announce to the world that I have no life what-so-ever. So disregard all that I have said. K? bye
-
You're absolutely right. Not only was Pfeiffer great in that, the whole damn film of "Fabulous Baker Boys" was great.
-
What Lies Beneath is a great movie. This site puts down every movie there ever was--even gladiator had bad reviews in these talkbacks so dont listen--and Bari stop following me around freak
-
Someone is constantly forgetting that Harrison starred in "Air Force One" ALSO recently and did a fantastic job in a fantastic movie that was a box office smash! Why always drudge up "Sabrina" and "Devil's Own", made before "Air Force One"?
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts