Le prix du secret

Lynn and Nancy both work in an office setting where everyone but the boss has cubicles. Nancy hates her job, while Lynn seems more dedicated but tries to sympathize with her friend.

Returning home from work on the subway, Lynn has headphones on and her music turned up loud. A frantic man runs up to her but she can't hear what he is saying. She just assumes he is a weirdo. Then Tony Franco enters with a gun. The man is shot, and a terrified Lynn flees, her clothes covered with blood.

Lynn eventually calms down while at the police station. There she meets Jack, who has long hair and a beard and gets passed over for promotions because he won't follow rules.

Tony and the man who was shot may have participated in an armed robbery where at least one person was killed, and what Lynn didn't hear may have been the location of the stolen money. The police decide to give Lynn a place to live and protection, placing a female cop in the apartment Lynn shares with Nancy. We don't see what happens in Lynn's apartment, but we sure spend a lot of time where Lynn is staying. And guess who spends more time there than anyone else? This seems like a soap opera at first, but a number of secrets get revealed (actually, that is characteristic of soaps) and numerous plot twists keep us guessing to the end. There's even some action. If you like soap opera, you might like this movie. I eventually did.

Justine Bateman has nice hair and looks good in her workout clothes (though we only get to see her jumping around for five seconds; what a shame). I don't think she has that pretty a face, yet so many male characters describe her as being so beautiful. In a movie like this, that's important. Actually, Bateman shows acting skill quite often. Just not consistently.

Colin Fox gives one of the standout performances as Richard, the man who raised Lynn after her parents died. Cynthia Dale makes an impact as Nancy in a few scenes, mostly later on.

The actor playing the head villain, though, gives the best performance of all. Since his name appears so high up in the credits, I have to assume this is Géza Kovács, though I never did catch the character's name.

There is some violence, but not too much. Obviously one of the early scenes is kind of bloody. There is mostly suspense and the fear something might happen. But mostly ... well, I can't give too much away, but soap describes it.

I actually ended up enjoying this.

IN THE EYES OF A STRANGER starts off with a bang. There's an exhilarating chase through a subway train and a bloody suicide. Then, things sort of bog down. Lynn (Justine Bateman) is suspected of knowing the whereabouts of some stolen money, and is being hunted by a group of criminals.

Enter Jack (Richard Dean Anderson), a cop assigned to protect Lynn. Not-so shockingly, romance blooms between them, causing the drama to fade for the next 40 minutes or so.

Thankfully, things pick up a bit, and a few unexpected turns lead to a smattering of suspense. Then, just as the story gets more interesting... more romance breaks out. At least there's a shootout to keep these two lovebirds busy!

The final twist -almost- makes up for the hit-and-miss quality of the rest of the production. While it's not bad for a made-for-TV movie, it's not altogether memorable either...

Sometimes, a chef puts together a twist on a classic gourmet dish. Then the chef's employer comes in and removes what makes the dish special and adds on a heavy sauce that ruins the fresh, sharp flavor.

That's what happened to "In The Eyes of a Stranger." The screenwriter is a cousin of mine. He began this script as a college project which subsequently won him a hefty academic grant. The script was marketed to several companies and was supposed to go into production with Elizabeth Shue in the lead. Unfortunately, that company tanked before the movie could be made. It was not, at that time, the story you now see. The story was much darker, the heroine much more lethal and the hero a great deal less lucky than in this production. Because it wound up as an ABC production, the writer ultimately had to change the ending to make it happy. He was NOT happy with this turn of events, but when you are supporting a wife and kids, you do what you have to, right???

I only bought this and watched it because I'm a Richard Dean Anderson fan, so I'm used to seeing him in TV series shows. Hey he's never won an Oscar, but I enjoy watching him because he's nice looking and always seems to be a likable character in any show or movie he's in (the majority of them). He and Justin Bateman don't disappoint in the movie. And it's nice to see Gordon Pinsent in it too. He's always entertaining. It's a very clear movie to follow with unexpected twists and turns to keep one interested. What more could a person get. One of your favorite TV actors in a romance, with a little police action, the question of will he do it or not, and an ending you don't know is coming until you get there. Plus the ending leaves you wondering what will happy to Justin's roommate in the movie. I've watched it several times because it's in my library of dvds, and I enjoy Richard Dean Anderson.

I was surprised at the strong negative comments toward this film in the "comments" section. It certainly doesn't deserve the skewering. When I first saw this movie, I thought it should have been a feature film. I was interested to read in one of the comments that that's exactly what it was, in a much darker version.

"In the Eyes of a Stranger" has some excellent elements, including the plot. The problem, of course, is just as one of the posters wrote, it was watered down for television and cast as such. The main character should be compelling, complicated and seductive. Justine Bateman has none of these adjectives in her repertoire.

But remembering that despite its potential, it is a TV movie after all, it comes off very well. I don't agree that the Bateman character would have been less calm in the first hour after the subway incident - look at her history, also look at what information she received.

I think one of the problems with the previous posts is that people got this film at their local video store instead of seeing it on Lifetime. As a video rental I don't think I'd have been too thrilled either. But why did you rent a movie starring Justine Bateman?