Absolutely Wretched!!!
This movie was horrible!! Psycho babble BS. Completely unbelievable!
That was 90 minutes of my life I will never get back!
Hmmm.. I wouldn't say it was absoultely wretched. It was a low budget indie (with a decent cast, in my opinion) that leaves me asking a lot of questions. It looks like this is the director's first written/directed by feature. That in mind, not a bad flick.
---SPOILER ALERT---
Here are a few problems I had, in general...
First of all, I rented this DVD from red box (I was honestly in the mood for Disturbia, which they didnt have and this looked entertaining) and the description made it sound like torture porn... something along the lines of "mysterious doctor moves to town and does strange experients on his neighbors." I hate torture porn. I'm glad this wasnt torture porn.
Steven Weber playing a pilot? really? Does he have a brother Joe?
Was the lawn mowing at 2 am scene necessary? I know the director was going for "I wanted to make him look like a wierdo." mission accomplished, except for, by the end we see that maybe he's not THAT messed up.
Steven Weber's character goes crazy, but why? Did he really think she was cheating on him? is Dr. Peeples trying to KILL/kidnap his son? It wasn't really explained all that well. And how did the kid end up in the pool? And why did he shave his head????? AHHHH!!!!!! TOO MANY PLOT HOLES!!!!!!
What really happened to Peeples' wife? was she the "dead body" he put in the car? and what's his deal with taking the car pool lane?
Was Kate Walsh married to "Frank"? If so, were they seperated, still living in the same cul de sac? if so, i find that very unrealistic and poorly explained.
Why did the kid have an irrational fear of water and why were his ink blot results so F-ed up? I take it the breif remark about a "waterbirth" is what caused the fear of water and the fact his mom is sleeping with kate walsh has something to do with the ink blots, but does that mean he's been watching his mom have sex with a woman and is that really "abuse?" That all seems WAY too contrived.
So this Doctor Peeples... Is he a crazy eccentric doctor, or a guy that's totally sane, that just has strange methods? I would guess the latter, but some things he does are just so bizzarre. Like the dummy so he can take the car pool lane, does he just miss his wife that much that he needs a dummy of her likeness?
___________
This movie reminded me of the twilight zone, but one of those episodes that has more of a moral than a twist. I was intrigued throughout, but I had a feeling early on that (A) the kid was adopted and Peeples was the father and (B) the *beep* he sold them had cameras and Peeples was watching his neighbors. Everything else is kind of vague for me, but this movie made me think, and I like watching movies that do that. Bravo!
--SPOILER ALERT---
I agree with you about the plot holes, butI thought that movie pretty much sucked because it was all too far fetched, although, yeah, the ending was a suprise.
I'm thinking that weird stuff with mowing the grass at 2am might've been to try to get people interested in that weirdo that's their neighbor so they'd buy his stuff at the garage sale. But I thought it was weird, too.
Why Steven Weber's character went crazy, I don't know. He was supposed to think that his wife was sleeping with Doctor Peoples and since he thought that Peoples was a killer, the thing with his son upset him. Still, he was acting completely crazy, and shaving his hair off made no sense at all. Probably not a good idea, either, if you think you have a custody battle ahead of you..
I don't think it matters what happened to Peoples wife, but the "body" in the car was that car pool lane dummy. He never killed anyone.
The kid was scared of water because of the waterbirth. I think the ink blot results were supposed to be messed up because he saw all the stuff that was going on around him, although it makes no sense. That one guy wouldn't hit his wife with anyone around and so forth, so either the kid watched all that stuff on Peoples screens in his basement, or he was spying on the people around him. *shrugs*
What really happened to Peeples' wife? was she the "dead body" he put in the car? and what's his deal with taking the car pool lane?
Was Kate Walsh married to "Frank"? If so, were they seperated, still living in the same cul de sac? if so, i find that very unrealistic and poorly explained.
Peoples' wife died during childbirth, the new age water birth that caused Obert to be terrified of water. The movie mentioned that Peoples had his license suspended for constantly driving in the carpool lane, that' why he had the lifelike dummy with him. He just doesn't like to ride in normal traffic.
Yes, Tyne was indeed married to Frank. She was divorcing him because she realized that she was a lesbian, but she wanted to stay in the cul de sac because she was in love with Maria.
Almost everything adds up, but I sill don't know what to make of the 2 am lawn mowing scene.
You smell like beef and cheese, you don't smell like Santa. share
I think the point of the 2AM mowing scene was to agitate the neighbors, stir things up. You could hear the fat guy talking about the 7 o'clock silence when Peeples was watching him beat his wife (I assume it was him anyway). I don't think it was ever really rolled into the plot very well, but that's my guess.
It also did get their attention. Everyone on the block showed up to his garage sale.
No, this movie WAS terrible. It may be considered a "low-budget" independent film, but this story did in no way merit the budget it did have. Ludicrous yet somehow predictable story, boring characters, and a waste of time.
I attended the original premiere of this at CineVegas in 2005, and the only question I wanted to ask the "director" at the end was "did the baseball card have a camera in it." It was laughably, stupidly bad.
[deleted]
My mom, my friend, and I watched this movie last night and the only thing that made this movie worth while was being able to make fun of everything. I mean, this movie is ridiculous. I will say it has a descent story, and the acting wasn't completely horrible, but the "twists" were so predictable and the things that happened were so comical i.e. the two friends meeting in an empty parking lot and still acting like they have to be secretive, driving with the dummy so you can get in the carpool lane when it's like 1 a.m., and what the heck was up with the whole lesbian thing? I mean that came out of absolutely nowhere.
The whole reason I even picked up this movie was because I knew Kate Walsh was in it, and her face was on the cover so I figured she must have had a big part, but she was in it for probably a total of two minutes.
If you're looking for a good laugh then I say rent this, but otherwise...
@Dodgerdog25
The fact that you have two praiseworthy paragraphs at the start and end of your writing but a HUGE middle section discussing the film's problems, well I think this explains well enough what a wreck this flick really is.
"Was the lawn mowing at 2 am scene necessary? I know the director was going for "I wanted to make him look like a wierdo." mission accomplished, except for, by the end we see that maybe he's not THAT messed up."
The point was to get the neighbor's attention - make them notice him.
"Steven Weber's character goes crazy, but why? Did he really think she was cheating on him? is Dr. Peeples trying to KILL/kidnap his son? It wasn't really explained all that well. And how did the kid end up in the pool? And why did he shave his head????? AHHHH!!!!!! TOO MANY PLOT HOLES!!!!!!'
His character was already extremely tightly wound - slipping past the edge was not that hard to believe. Yes, he really thought she was cheating on him and the doctor made sure he thought that. Of course doctor peeples wasn't trying to kill/kidnap the child. It was explained extremely well. Dr. Peeple's was the kid's biological father. He was trying to help him by helping the people around him, albeit in a very unconventional way. The kid ran away because he thought he was going to a psychiatric facility. My guess is he got in the pool himself, because he knew that his fear of water was the source of his psychiatric problems and wanted to please his parents. Steven Weber's character shaving his head was a symbolic action.
"What really happened to Peeples' wife? was she the "dead body" he put in the car? and what's his deal with taking the car pool lane?"
Did you watch the movie at all? Seriously? His wife died giving birth to his son (who was subsequently adopted by Norman and Maria). We saw the birth/death certificates at the end, as well as the certificate of adoption. The "dead body" is the dummy he uses for the car pool lane. This is not unusual, lots of people do it. What is unusual is that he doesn't actually commute to any job.
"Was Kate Walsh married to "Frank"? If so, were they seperated, still living in the same cul de sac? if so, i find that very unrealistic and poorly explained."
Yes. She was married to frank. They were still living in the same neighborhood, yes. That is not that unrealistic. She had friends in the neighborhood. She had rented the house temporarily until their house could be sold or settled in the divorce. The separation had just happened.
"Why did the kid have an irrational fear of water and why were his ink blot results so F-ed up? I take it the breif remark about a "waterbirth" is what caused the fear of water and the fact his mom is sleeping with kate walsh has something to do with the ink blots, but does that mean he's been watching his mom have sex with a woman and is that really "abuse?" That all seems WAY too contrived."
It was hardly a "brief remark" about water birth - it was the pivotal information about his birth. He was born in the water, his birth mother died giving birth to him. The idea is that at an infantile level he was aware of the trauma at his birth. The inkblot test was very clearly explained. Each and every description he gave was identical to the scenes taking place on the video monitors in Doctor Peeople's basement. The kid was well established as inquisitive, using the stethoscope to listen and investigate. It's obvious that he found a way into the basement and saw the videos. Each one was represented in an inkblot - a man hitting a woman on the back and face, two women touching "privates," being punched and kissed at the same time (the BDSM couple). And no, there was no abuse. Sheesh. Because of his answers with the inkblots, though, it APPEARED as abuse to the psychiatrist. The theme of misinterpretation of facts ran throughout the entire movie.
"So this Doctor Peeples... Is he a crazy eccentric doctor, or a guy that's totally sane, that just has strange methods? I would guess the latter, but some things he does are just so bizzarre. Like the dummy so he can take the car pool lane, does he just miss his wife that much that he needs a dummy of her likeness?"
Um... wow.
The ending ruined the movie, it was borderline parody for awhile, albeit interesting, but then they expect you to take all this far fetched nonsense seriously.
share