Un grido nel buio

I'm sorry but rosanna overacts and is unbelievable. Somewhat entertaining as a whodunnit but predictable. Thank goodness for Mr Patton and Perkins who at least held up the story somewhat.

Lots of twists and turns, Anthony Perkins was great, the love interest was the most unappealing love interest, and the brother and sister are Folgers Coffee level of closeness, but it was a nice way to kill a rainy afternoon.

Rosanna Arquette stars as a children's book author who confronts stalker Anthony Perkins, who believes Arquette holds the key to solving a series of brutal murders in a woodsy town. Overstuffed adaptation of Nicholas Condé's book has a cycle of recurring suspects, requiring Arquette to accuse a different man of murder every few minutes. Perkins, in his final film, has lost his famous guilty twitch; solemn here, and dull, he fades into the background (it's easy to forget Perkins is even in the picture). The piecing-together of the mystery is fun, though it doesn't bear close scrutiny; there's also one of those last-act "killer transformations" that have become a genre cliché (that and the proverbial POV shots as the killer stalks his prey). Which brings up another problem: why do the victims--strong, independent businesswomen--suddenly turn into helpless, whimpering victims when faced with a killer? What point are writers Robert Nathan and Robert Rosenblum trying to make...that women are simply not safe without a man in their lives? Ridiculous. ** from ****

I don't watch 90s movies often, i'm more of an 80s and 70s kind of gal myself, but this was a nice change of pace. Rosanne Arquette is gorgeous and so perfectly 90s, and Anthony Perkins is amazing as always. Not bad for a TV movie but extremely formulaic in the way that Tobe Hooper's Toolbox Murders was. And enjoyable in the same way that one was too. There are a lot of plot holes however, and it's very melodramatic. The stupid argument with the boyfriend just made me livid with how unrealistic and petty it was. A good thing was the outfits. But is that really to their credit? They just dressed like they were from 1992. They were. It's only enjoyable in retrospect. Another thing was the soundtrack- at times. It wasn't great all the way through but at times it surpassed the general mediocrity. For a TV movie though, surprisingly not bad. Overall fun to watch.

Back to back, from one decent TV thriller ('Through the Eyes of a Killer') to somewhat another. Yeah somewhat. I'm kind of lukewarm on it. 'In the Deep Woods' had the ingredients for a tight, relentless and interesting thriller, but director Charles Correll's sinuously pedestrian handling and Robert Nathan and Robert Rosenblum's material (adapted from Nicholas Conde's novel) piles on the red herrings and all too convenient developments. By being a knotty plot, it keeps you off balance and never strikes me as predictable. It's just hard to believe some incidents, as some things that occur just had me thinking "Oh, why?". Everything seems to move at a snail's pace, but you stay with it because you want to know how it'll pan out. There's a few effective suspenseful sequences and a very dreary tone streaming through it, but there's just too many generic and replicate patterns. Its well shot, edited and leanly scored. This would be Anthony Perkins last role, and it's a blank performance (just think of his failing condition), but his stable presence eventually wins out. The perky Patricia Arquette is suitably fine in the heroine role. As for Will Patton, he looks lost at sea with his character.