(Nice to know the upper middle-class have to deal with supernatural shit, too…)
CAST: Harrison Ford, Michelle Pfeiffer, Amber Valletta, Diana Scarwid, Wendy Crewson.
DIRECTOR: Robert Zemeckis
WARNING: Some SPOILERS and one really good reason to not have any extra-marital affairs - straight ahead…
IT’S LIKE THIS: Perfect couple Norman and Claire Spencer (Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer) have just sent off their daughter to college, so they think they‘ve got the house all to themselves now. Wrong. Soon, strange things start happening like doors opening and pictures falling by themselves, as well as strange whisperings. These things usually happen when Claire is alone, making Norman wonder if his wife isn’t suffering from Empty Nest Syndrome or some shit. Do these phenomena have anything to do with the woman next door whom Claire thinks has been murdered by her husband? Is the woman trying to reach out to Claire with a message? Claire makes like Nancy Drew to try and find out. Trouble ensues.
THE DUDE (OR DUDETTE) MOST LIKELY TO SAVE THE DAY: That would be Claire, herself. Since Norman’s about as useful as a condom with a hole in it.
EYE CANDY MOST LIKELY TO FIRE UP A WOODY: Harrison Ford looks too much like a relative for me to get fired up over. So that leaves Michelle Pfeiffer and Amber Valletta, who plays Norman’s mysterious (and potentially deadly) dead lover Madison, which pretty much proves that Norman is one lucky bastard - it means at one point he was fucking two of the most beautiful women on the Eastern seaboard.
MOST INTENTIONALLY SCARY SCENE: Madison’s reflection showing up in Claire’s bathwater. Way to make Clair piss herself, Maddie….
MOST UNINTENTIONALLY SCARY SCENE: Claire comparing intra-cellular biological division to a hot gang-bang between three jocks and a cheerleader. I am not even kidding.
HOTTEST SCENE: We get Harrison Ford with his shirt off, but given that I‘ve already mentioned he could be an Uncle, I don‘t even want to go there. So I’d have to go with the scene where Claire is possessed by Madison and flirts with Norman using an apple (you have to see it to believe it) before going all BASIC INSTINCT on him on the dinner table. Who says middle-aged people don’t behave like horny jack-rabbits?
INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW: What the fuck is going on in Norman and Claire’s house? Who is the ghost haunting them? Is it the missing wife from next door? Or someone else? Someone from Norman’s past? Ahem? Look, I don’t feel bad spoiling that because the goddamned poster and trailer already did. Talk to the studio, not me.
WHY YOU SHOULD WATCH “WHAT LIES BENEATH”: If you like horror movies (or just movies, in general) that are not focused on teenyboppers or college students, but instead on old farts, er, middle-aged people. If you also like reasonably suspenseful and entertaining supernatural thrillers that are just a little predictable. Added points if you are Harry Ford and Michie Pfeiffer fans.
WHY YOU MAY NOT ENJOY “WHAT LIES BENEATH”: If you dislike Harry Ford and Michie Pfeiffer, and older stars in general, you may want to check out the PROM NIGHT remake instead, which is filled with hot young things who couldn‘t act their way out of a paper bag. Meow. You may also want to avoid this if you have a short attention span, because WHAT LIES BENEATH is one quiet movie.
FINAL ANALYSIS: There are some films that are both helped and hurt by their posters and trailers. WHAT LIES BENEATH is one of those films, so much so that I debated posting the poster and trailer, for fear of giving away the twist for those who haven’t seen the movie. The trailer makes the movie look like what it is: a good, solid supernatural thriller. Unfortunately, the trailer also gives away WHAT LIES BENEATH’s central twist. Ultimately, I decide to just go ahead and do it. Knowing the film’s main plot twist (the ghost is actually Norman’s dead lover) doesn’t detract from enjoying this well-made and elegantly scary movie. The only setback is that, if you already know who the ghost really is, the entire first act where Claire investigates the “missing neighbor” subplot seems unnecessary and potentially tedious since we already know the phantom’s identity because of the poster and trailers. Fortunately, Michelle Pfeiffer is such a luminous and empathetic screen presence that we don’t mind taking the journey with her, even if we know (and she doesn’t) what the ultimate destination is.
Indeed, without Pfeiffer and Harrison Ford in the main roles (Ford is just as excellent as Pfeiffer), WHAT LIES BENEATH could’ve been a direct-to-DVD affair. Robert Zemeckis’ direction, which purposefully evokes much of Alfred Hitchcock’s style, further lends the film some added gravity. Zemeckis is not afraid to let a scene drag on in silence to near-excruciating levels. This has the effect of making us anticipate something about to happen, to break all that silence. This method also echoes Stanley Kubrick’s eerie approach to THE SHINING (review coming up), which resulted in one of the most atypical and unexpectedly horrifying haunted house movies ever. As I mentioned before, WHAT LIES BENEATH will not appeal to audiences who get restless very easily. This film’s power lies in how it effectively portrays the threat often hidden by silent, placid surfaces.
All in all, WHAT LIES BENEATH is a clever, engaging supernatural film that is closer to a mystery/thriller than an outright horror film. Despite the poster and trailer giving away the central secret of the film, there are still a couple more strong ones waiting at the end. Those, I will not give away.
Also, the sharp-eyed among you will note that Claire and Norman's names are a tribute to Claire Norman (Trish Van Devere), the heroine of THE CHANGELING (review #227), an earlier haunted house flick about another vengeful spirit reaching out from beyond the grave to influence a living person to mete out justice. Clearly, THE CHANGELING influenced WHAT LIES BENEATH...
