Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaA group of female friends in San Francisco investigate a serial killer targeting newlyweds.A group of female friends in San Francisco investigate a serial killer targeting newlyweds.A group of female friends in San Francisco investigate a serial killer targeting newlyweds.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
John Reardon
- David Brandt
- (as John Henry Reardon)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
As a James Patterson fan, I was really interested in seeing how this film was adapted from the book. I also wanted to see Angie Everhart. I they knew she was in Bucket of Blood early in her career, it would have helped them solve the murders.
I liked all of the leads - Tracey Pollan as Inspector Boxer, Carly Pope as the reporter, Megan Gallagher as Jil, and, especially Pam Grier as Dr. Washburn.
Robert Patrick (The Marine, Flags of Our Fathers, Terminator 2: Judgment Day) was especially good as the suspected killer.
Fans of the new Women's Murder Club on TV will want to check this out.
I liked all of the leads - Tracey Pollan as Inspector Boxer, Carly Pope as the reporter, Megan Gallagher as Jil, and, especially Pam Grier as Dr. Washburn.
Robert Patrick (The Marine, Flags of Our Fathers, Terminator 2: Judgment Day) was especially good as the suspected killer.
Fans of the new Women's Murder Club on TV will want to check this out.
...he has to be a better writer than this movie portrayed.
The actors and actresses were excellent. Especially noteworthy, as has already been mentioned, were Tracy Pollen and Robert Patrick.
But...by the time I got to the end of this movie, I was totally confused. Who did what/why/when/how?? I got what the final motive was supposed to be, but that was about all.
And could someone explain to me the meaning of the Russian roulette scene?
I guess I need to get one of Patterson's books to read before I sit through another Patterson adaptation. Usually seeing a good made-for-TV movie makes me want to go buy the writer's work for enjoyment. In this case, I feel the need to go read this book so I can understand what I just spent the last 2+ hours watching. I'm not so much intrigued as annoyed.
Five stars out of ten for casting. Nothing for storyline. What I got most from this movie was a frustrating headache...
The actors and actresses were excellent. Especially noteworthy, as has already been mentioned, were Tracy Pollen and Robert Patrick.
But...by the time I got to the end of this movie, I was totally confused. Who did what/why/when/how?? I got what the final motive was supposed to be, but that was about all.
And could someone explain to me the meaning of the Russian roulette scene?
I guess I need to get one of Patterson's books to read before I sit through another Patterson adaptation. Usually seeing a good made-for-TV movie makes me want to go buy the writer's work for enjoyment. In this case, I feel the need to go read this book so I can understand what I just spent the last 2+ hours watching. I'm not so much intrigued as annoyed.
Five stars out of ten for casting. Nothing for storyline. What I got most from this movie was a frustrating headache...
Okay, so I thought this movie would be interesting despite that it was made for TV. But, my God I have not seen a worse movie! The fact that it was entirely predictable throughout the entire thing made it much worse. I thought I was going to watch a movie that had plot twisters. Wrong again.
Another thing was the horrible acting! Now, I am a huge fan of Robert Patrick because of his work in the Terminator and the X-Files. But his performance greatly disappointed me. Along with another X-Files mate of his, Mitch Pileggi, who didn't do much better. Tracy Pollan definitely can pull of the not so ditzy but nevertheless dumb blonde.
I was glad when the disgustingly abrupt ending came, the final words being from one of the "girls".
"It must have been terrible." Yeah, it was terrible. Let me give you some advice. Don't waste 3 hours on this movie. It's not worth it.
Another thing was the horrible acting! Now, I am a huge fan of Robert Patrick because of his work in the Terminator and the X-Files. But his performance greatly disappointed me. Along with another X-Files mate of his, Mitch Pileggi, who didn't do much better. Tracy Pollan definitely can pull of the not so ditzy but nevertheless dumb blonde.
I was glad when the disgustingly abrupt ending came, the final words being from one of the "girls".
"It must have been terrible." Yeah, it was terrible. Let me give you some advice. Don't waste 3 hours on this movie. It's not worth it.
An okay thriller. Not great. Not good, really, just okay. Based on the cheesily provocative novel by James Patterson, this three-hour movie event brought to you by the peacock network is about a women's coffee-klatsch trying to bust a serial killer who preys on newlyweds. This klatsch includes a very competent Tracy Pollan (L & O; SVU), the great Pam Grier (Jackie Brown), perky and pretty Carly Pope (Orange County) and veteran TV HITG Megan Gallagher (Hill Street Blues, Larry Sanders, and everything in between). Their chief suspect is a highly desirable undesirable named Nicholas Jenks (Robert Patrick of X-Files). Some of the good things about this movie: Carly Pope's imitation of a skank, Mitch Pileggi (X-Files) showing off his leg (Grazie!), Eddie, the flower delivery boy, the saucy vintner ("His restaurants are terrible!"), the Cleveland wedding spectacle, Pam Grier and, yes, Robert Patrick. I wish the movie could have just been Robert Patrick and Pam Grier. Here's an idea for a series: he's a crook in L.A. who's been flipped by the Feds, she's a no-nonsense Fibbie assigned to be his handler as he skulks the underbelly of the City of Angels, snitching... Ah, where was I? Right. The bad things about this movie: the romance between Gil Bellows (The Agency) and Pollan, the "You go, girl!" attitude of the Murder Club, Pileggi's mustache, Patrick's earring, the plot, the ending, the cheesy CSI effects and Gil Bellows. O, Gil! You were so fine in Love and a 45 and now DEK's gone and crushed your finesse under his well-manicured thumb. Damn you, DEK! Damn you to hell! Ahem. Michael O'Hara (Murder in the Heartland) does a fair job adapting a poor novel into something somewhat entertaining and wisely changes the ending. It's not the ending I would have wanted but it was a hell of a lot better than Patterson's original idea. Russell Mulcahy, meanwhile, is wise to return to his beloved genre of Scots & SciFi (The Highlander: The Source) after this so-so effort. Not even Sean Young's violent death or Angie Everhart's breasts could save this movie from mediocrity. Now, about that series...
Having not read the novel, I can't tell how faithful this film is. The story is typical mystery material: killer targets newlyweds; woman investigator falls in love with her partner and is diagnosed with a fatal disease. Yes, it sounds like a soap opera and that's exactly how it plays. The first 2/3 are dull, save for the murders and the last 1/3 makes a partial comeback as it picks up speed toward its twisty conclusion.
Acting is strictly sub par, though it's hard to blame the actors alone: the screenplay is atrocious. During the last 1/3 you stop noticing because the film actually becomes interesting, but that's only the last 1/3. Director Russell Mulcahy is very much in his element, but there's only so much he can do with a TV budget and the network censors on his back. He's pretty much limited to quick cutting and distorted lenses, though he managed to squeeze in a couple "under the floor" shots during the murders in the club restroom. Unfortunately, as this is made for TV, the cool compositional details he uses so well with a wider image are nowhere to be found. Note to producers: give this man a reasonable budget and an anamorphic lens when you hire him.
Summing it up: this film is bad by cinema standards and mediocre by TV standards(watch CSI, instead). If you're in the mood for a film like this, I've some excellent suggestions: pick up a copy of Dario Argento's "Deep Red"(my highest recommendation; superb film), "Opera", or even "Tenebre". They're stronger in every category.
Acting is strictly sub par, though it's hard to blame the actors alone: the screenplay is atrocious. During the last 1/3 you stop noticing because the film actually becomes interesting, but that's only the last 1/3. Director Russell Mulcahy is very much in his element, but there's only so much he can do with a TV budget and the network censors on his back. He's pretty much limited to quick cutting and distorted lenses, though he managed to squeeze in a couple "under the floor" shots during the murders in the club restroom. Unfortunately, as this is made for TV, the cool compositional details he uses so well with a wider image are nowhere to be found. Note to producers: give this man a reasonable budget and an anamorphic lens when you hire him.
Summing it up: this film is bad by cinema standards and mediocre by TV standards(watch CSI, instead). If you're in the mood for a film like this, I've some excellent suggestions: pick up a copy of Dario Argento's "Deep Red"(my highest recommendation; superb film), "Opera", or even "Tenebre". They're stronger in every category.
Você sabia?
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Nicholas Jenks escapes from the Department of Corrections car, he kicks out the rear window in order to get out. When the police are at the crash scene, the window is back in place.
- ConexõesReferences O Fugitivo (1963)
- Trilhas sonorasTell Me That You Love Me Tonight
Written by Joe Lervold , Larry Batiste & Dennis Wadlington
Courtesy of Master Source
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Núpcias de Sangue
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 3 h(180 min)
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.33 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente