Harcelée par mon voisin

Alone in her West Hollywood condo, pretty blonde teenager Kelcie Stranahan (as Jodi Allen) is attacked and raped by an intruder while talking to her mom on laptop video. Three months later, single mom Amy Pietz (as Andrea Allen) has moved her daughter to a presumably safer suburb near the Angeles Crest Mountains. Still skittish, Ms. Stranahan occupies herself taking photographs of the neighbors. With her zoom-lens, she specializes taking pictures of handsome young men in the neighborhood. Stranahan is a real "Peeping Tom" (or, more appropriately, a "Peeping Tina"). An obvious favorite is muscular young Grant Harvey (as Nick Thompkin). Stranahan happily catches him washing his truck while wearing only a baggy pair of sweat-shorts...

This ends up being an ordinary and very predictable "Lifetime" TV movie thriller, but you have to give writer-director Doug Campbell credit for so obviously portraying heroine Stranahan with what some might consider a character flaw; apparently, she takes "half naked" photos of young men for her own personal enjoyment. She also takes pictures of her neighbors' windows at night. Soon, she thinks she has witnessed a deadly crime. This updates what many correctly saw as perverse subtext in Alfred Hitchcock's "Rear Window" (1954). But, back to this story. The camera angles are nicely done, especially when Stranahan checks another neighbor's house for an intruder while wearing her own little shorts. "Lifetime" knows its PG audience.

***** Stalked by My Neighbor (2015-03-21) Doug Campbell ~ Kelcie Stranahan, Grant Harvey, Amy Pietz, Katrina Norman

The title isn't quite accurate. Not a stalking movie at all. The story is about a teen girl who is raped in the city moves to the burbs with her mom. She is still a little paranoid and starts taking pictures of her neighbors. There is a murder of her neighbor and then she proceeds to uncover things. Things move quite quickly as her suspicions about the murderer change.

Worth one watch.

One of the other contributors hit the nail on the head when they said the title of the movie was wrong. In fact it was in fact Jodi who was the stalker, photographing the neighbors without their knowledge like a peeping tom, and following them and breaking into their homes.

The story line per usual was ridiculous. Jodi had massive trauma only three months earlier when she was raped at home. And yet here she is drooling over a neighbor boy taking pictures of him even after he catches her doing it. I do not want to assume anything about rape victims in real life nor do I wish to disrespect them, but to me it seemed far-fetched that someone like Jodi who at such a young fragile age goes through such a horrific experience and apart from a few scenes where she is on edge and jumpy, for the rest of the movie she acts so normal and even gets romantically drawn to the neighbor boy whom she has only known for three weeks.

And the lecture Nick gives Jodi's mom was just pathetic. The movie tried to copy Hitchcock's Rear Window and the newer Shia Labeouf movie Disturbia, both of which were in the league of their own.

Same idea, same story-line, same boring actors and same boredom in watching. However it's good when you're working at your desk and need some sound to break the silence. Not having to watch the silly nonsense is a treat, believe me. I won't mention names as I don't want to promote these bad poker faced actors. Plot wise without delving into specifics so as to not let you know the contents (you must be forced to watch this tripe). The leading lady is so wrong for the role. Although the role has something to be desired. This film is trying to make a hero out of a snoopy young thing that goes around taking candid pictures of her neighbors without their permission. Totally in the wrong, she expects sympathy? You gotta be kidding. You want her to get her up-pence. There is no compassion for someone who goes around accusing innocent people and interfering with their lives. Get a life, sweetie.

... so little time. Although as someone else pointed out, this is not really accurate ... or rather a bit missleading. Which isn't a bad thing, if you consider that the movie itself is fairly easy to see through. At the beginning you may feel like me - confused. Because it's like alright, this is way crazy. Then you get the reveal and you're like ... ah well.

The thing is, the movie may work until that moment. Somewhat work. But after that moment? It's downhill from there. It's almost a shame, but then again the acting might be an indicator ... a sort of warning sign. This is obviously a movie made for TV. And not HBO TV or Netflix if you count that as TV (some even call the latter the death bringer of TV). Anyway, very predictable from that one reveal and really not daring that much - not to mention all the crazy characters and their slow thinking - to put it mildly