Mauvaise influence

To some degree this is a bit of an oddity. As the movie first begins it feels very much like it's adopting one particular tone, but there comes a point where it completely turns around and goes a very different way through to the end. At the start the feature is astoundingly direct, foregoing any subtlety or nuance in Vic Sarin's direction, any aspect of Shelley Gillen's writing, and no small part of the acting. Even the wardrobe for star Jessica Lowndes is emphatically, uh, "unrestrained," shall we say. For all this, 'A mother's nightmare' veers rather close to blustery B-movie territory, and one regrets that Lowndes, as the classic Lifetime antagonist, isn't given an opportunity to wholly overact and throw herself about with abandon (see Allison Paige's wonderful romp in 'My killer client,' or Jonathan Bennett's wide-eyed villainy in 'Deadly yoga retreat'), instead illustrating some of the tact the picture is otherwise initially missing. The feature is enjoyable at this point, but comes off as struggling to find itself. Once the narrative jukes hard to the left it doesn't swerve therefrom - and becomes unexpectedly dark by the network's standards - but it's quite the journey that it takes us on from the approximate first half to the second.

I very much like this, and I think it's the most earnest thriller I've seen to date from a channel known (fairly or not) for middling melodrama. It also would have surely benefited from a more even-handed approach. In addition, there are two further indelicacies of note, neither of which are uncommon to Lifetime's pictures. The first is the demonization of mental illness. Hand in hand with the network's storytelling style of often little tact, mental illness is rarely treated with any meaningful delicacy, and that fault applies here. Secondly, it seems to me as though 'A mother's nightmare' is weirdly and especially inelegant in painting Vanessa as such a fiercely, wholly villainous young woman. It feels like Lifetime is playing right into the hands of real-life misogynists who proclaim the evil of women, and the falsehood of every accusation of sexual assault and awful behavior of men. These two factors, in combination with the swing in tone and for that matter both tones themselves, mark this feature as somewhat troubled, no matter how good it is otherwise.

I think it's important to highlight the flaws here, notable as they are, and it's a bit of a jumble to untangle. With that said, however, for all the weaknesses, I can also honestly say this movie is better than I expected, or than I had assumed when it first began. Get past the stumbling blocks, and Gillen's writing takes us on a trip that's more forcefully intricate and grim than one tends to anticipate from TV movies. For better or for worse the characters and dialogue are suitably believable - or in the case of Vanessa, so astoundingly malevolent as to take on a stature all their own. The scene writing is sharp and vivid, and the narrative as a whole is gratifyingly twisted and compelling, however uncomfortable it may get at points. The only major deficiency that I see in the writing is the lack of a concrete explanation given for Vanessa's behavior; then again, who says there always is one? Save for the tonal issues, I think Sarin's direction is strong and capable, and along with mindful cinematography and editing feeds into the sparking ferocity about the picture.

The acting is to an extent influenced by those same matters I've already described. Some performances seem overdone and aggravating, but in fairness, this also seems by design, whether of the character writing (the friends of hapless teen Chris) or of the network's proclivities (Chris' kind-of rival). Grant Gustin's portrayal of Chris is harder to pin down, for all told he seems a bit all over the place - but then, given that the character is completely out of his depths and having his world rocked, I suppose the scattered depiction is actually rather appropriate. Annabeth Gish, reliable an actor as she is, anchors the film as devoted mother Maddie, providing a steadying counterbalance relative to everyone else that's refreshing at all the times she needs to be. Still, it's indisputably Lowndes who is the real star of 'A mother's nightmare.' With Sarin's direction tempering the wildest possibilities of what the feature might have been, and therefore the character, Lowndes is able to explore the villainess with a tack at once sinister and disturbing, but also calculated and sincere. The only thing worse than a person who has completely lost themselves in their violence and wicked impulses is a person who knowingly conducts themselves with such cruelty, and with that vibe firmly established, there's an intensity in Lowndes' acting here that's both unsettling and delicious as a viewer.

It's worth observing that for all that this movie does well, it's still a Lifetime original movie. Anyone who can't get on board with what this niche genre represents probably won't find anything in this iteration to change their mind, nevermind the specific issues I've noted. Yet there's a cold vibrancy about the production that sets it apart as far as I'm concerned, and though uneven, I don't think it's wrong to say that with a minor bit of tweaking this might even come off as something more than the TV film it is. All the contributions of those behind the scenes are splendid, including hair and makeup (and yes, even costume design); the writing is pretty tight, the acting is better than it first appears, and the direction ties everything together well, if imperfectly. All I can say is that I had more of a good time watching than I figured I would, and this likewise had more impact - and that has to count for something. With Jessica Lowndes almost definitely taking the prize here more than anyone else, I dare say that 'A mother's nightmare' is among the stronger thrillers that the channel has ever put out, and surely the most glum. It won't appeal to all, but if you're open to what the medium tends to offer at large, then I think you'll be surprised like I was.

I hated Vanessa from opening scene. I honestly dislike the mother too. Chris was just an emotional basket case. He was easily manipulated by the chick. His dad should have played a bigger role. Why didn't mom ask more questions the first night? In a desperate plight to be wanted Chris fell into the spiders web. Acting was okay considering I didn't like most people in the movie..Why didn't mom reach out to foster parents first night. As a parent you need to know who is at your house and who your child is hanging with. I could never stay at someone's house if my parents didn't know their parents .

Now although some of you's like the movie and story line and action I am sure is good. But what I myself don't agree with it is like when Chris and this chick meet they made it out like they have known one another lot longer than just meeting.

That didn't not make sense if this guy was being picked out than they should not have been that chummy that fast before even start going together and such.

How many more lines do you want me too type before I can post this message which is stupid all the requirement's you have too go through just too make a comment on a movie.

I generously rated 9 but two issues: First a general law defect that prejudge the guy guilty and assume girl is the victim considering the girl's background and not accessing the confidential psychiatric issues of her... two guys had lost their lives having her involved but first guy arrested and assumed guilty (opposite to what law favors men in the other part of the world). Second question is why his father disappeared following up on his son's case later while at the beginning he is the one got some useful clue about Vanessa's life history!

This movie is absolute garbage. It feels like a Tommy Wiseau production, honestly. The 9-star reviews are laughable and clearly fake.