Una sconosciuta nell'ombra

I had gained a huge obsession with with the novel Stranger with My Face, written by Lois Duncan, after reading it 3 times.

Books that get made into movies always get bad feedback, for example: Twilight, The Da Vinci Code etc. So don't be surprised if you find yourself hating this film. There have been large changes to the movie compared to the novel. Laurie is originally Indian looking, unfortunately, she is casted with Alexz Johnson who is a blonde white girl. Significant characters; Neal, Meghan and her Father had been removed from the story. The existing characters are also very different however they are somewhat likable. The casting in this is film is good based on the screenplay, yet horrible compared to the novel. As much as I liked the novel I found myself connecting well with the loosely based characters; Laurie, Helen, Gordon, Shelley and Alexis.

I did enjoy the film, but I enjoyed the book better. I am a huge fan of horror films and I can adapt well with straight to DVD/TV films. If you enjoyed the book you may not enjoy the movie as huge changes have been made. Its not a great movie. But its not a horrible movie. I'd rather watch this instead of "Wrong Turn 2" or "Joy Ride 2."

Give it a chance see if you like it. Its not terrible and trust me its better than most movies that weren't released in theaters.

I waited and waited and waited for this movie to get better, and when it did, it was too late. I kept referring back to the book, which was very detailed, and although I understand it is normal to take poetic license with a book, there were a few glaring errors: (WARNING: POSSIBLE SPOILERS)

1. James Stratton doesn't die in the book, and it is Shelley (the mother) who is the painter, NOT Laurie.

2. Helen Tuttle is the one who introduces Laurie to 'astral projection' in the novel..they completely destroyed her character in the movie, making her a somewhat psychic, but unbelieving character, making believe that Laurie suddenly 'discovered' astral projection' on her own.

3. The Native American aspect was totally ignored, as mentioned in the last post. It is the fetish that is supposed to protect Laurie and has a very prominent story point at the end of the novel.

For the most part, it was only during the last part of the movie did the true nature of Lois Duncan's excellent YA novel come through...but for me it was a waste of time. 2 out of 5 stars. I am sure Lois Duncan didn't approve of this. I'd love to hear what she thought.

Laurie (Alexz Johnson) is haunted with the accidental death of her father. Her mother Shelley Stratton (Catherine Hicks) moves her and sister Alexis (Emily Hirst) to the family's remote country home. Alexis claims that Laurie tried to choke her in her sleep. Some of the kids at her new school seems to know her or seen her when it wasn't her.

This tries to do the it's-all-in-her-head misdirection. It's trying to be a paranoid mystery. It needs to hold back some of the school kids. It needs to slow-roll the information and maybe leave the reveal to the third act. It also needs better directing style to make this work. I can see this done in a better way. This is a Lifetime movie but the story may fit better as a psychological horror.

I brought my daughter up to love horror films, but she also has an inexplicable liking for crap Canadian films, which is how I ended up watching Stranger With My Face, a made-for-TV supernatural thriller starring Alexz Johnson and Catherine Hicks. My daughter enjoyed it; I was less impressed.

Johnson plays teenager Laurie Stratton, who is struggling with the death of her father. A series of strange incidents leads Laurie to believe that she has a doppleganger who has been taking her place but her concerned friends and family think that she is imagining things as a result of her trauma. Eventually, Laurie learns that she was adopted and that she has an evil twin sister who has been using astral projection to cause trouble.

To be fair, there's potential for a good film here -- the astral projection idea is fun -- but the horrible Lifetime production values mean that the result is cheap and tacky. The direction is weak, the writing is lame, the acting is barely passable, and the special effects are bargain basement. The best moments feel like they have been cribbed from Ghost (1990) and A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987).

3/10.

I am not a syfy fan but the film had enough "Lifetime" in it that I really didn't notice the syfy. However the script supervisor was off their game...again.