Vertigini

Like most people who viewed this movie I suspect, I picked up this movie because Wes Craven's name was listed prominently on the cover, in the credits on the back, etc. Lo and behold, this is not directed, written, nor overseen by Mr. Craven, but only produced by him. A sad case of marketing over matter. Well, who cares, right? I do, because what lay inside the DVD case was a fairly mediocre movie that doesn't seem to know if it's a psycho-thriller or a character study or a murder mystery. Kinney's take as the psychologist is the only really good acting here (the heroine is particularly dull in her delivery) and the cinematography, which should make us vertiginous, just feels static. There was a bit here to work with, script and plot wise, but it's been done (Diabolique, Vertigo, Mousetrap) before, and done better. C-.

A professional woman (played well by Megan Ward) is haunted by shocking visions when her younger sister is tragically killed by falling from a cliff. For people like me who suffer from acrophobia (a fear of heights) the tense opening scene (and others during the movie) will induce sweaty palms, I found it genuinely scary. Hitchcock's far superior Vertigo sprang to mind a few times. Released as Wes Craven Presents Don't Look Down, this really is NOT a Craven movie. My VHS copy comes with the ridiculous quote "This is the best Wes Craven movie that I have ever seen" on the cover. Sure, there are some Craven touches here and there, but he served as one of several producers. This is a horror/thriller that has some good qualities but has made for TV written all over it. BBFC rated 12 here in the UK, low on adult themes but still manages to pack a scare or two. Worth seeing.

Seeing the name Wes Craven here, I was expecting far more in the way of horror if not suspense. Disappointed on both accounts. In a word, silly. The acting was extremely bad with second rate, basically unknown, actors. I'm undecided as if it was the story that was lacking and Meryl Streep could have made it quite interesting, or if it was just a terrible plot and an uninspired director. Either way, don't say you haven't been warned. Better to spend those 2 hours of your life rewatching one of your favorite movies. Try Alfred Hitchcock.

When I first started watching this film, I thought "oh no, not another low budget, waste of time", but actually I changed my mind after about ten minutes. It was a good story (although very predictable), but one that you have to watch right till the end, just to confirm what you have already figured out. However, I do have to say that although I predicted everything about this film, much to my dad and sisters' annoyance, I thought the ending was good.

This wasn't exactly what I had expected from a Wes Craven movie, it wasn't entirely bad, but it certainly won't be a movie I'll remember in a month, possibly not even next week - it has a predictable villain and a paper thin story. The worst aspect of the movie was probably the way the antagonist revealed his 'dastardly' plan at the end, no surprises here. My rating: 2/10