Not much lies beneath, but uncovering it is fun. - What Lies Beneath Reviews

What Lies Beneath is an effective entry into the horror genre (though it's basis lies more in the roots of Hitchcock and suspense/thrillers in general), which has been collapsing under the strain of terrible teen-based films. This time, we have Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer, two fine middle-aged performers who are both in top form here. So is Robert Zemeckis, whose 3 year hiatus has grown a build-up for his fans-including me-out there expecting some quality cinema, and while this film isn't the classic his previous 2 were (Forrest Gump and Contact), it's far better than what a lot of critics have given it credit for. Norman and Claire Spencer (Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer, respectively) are a happily married New England couple whose grown-up daughter just left home for college. Claire is getting adjusted to that fact, at the same time trying to get adjusted to the new house they've just moved into. To get her mind off her troubles, Claire decides to meet their neighbors, another married couple, James and Mary Feur. But Claire begins to suspect there's something wrong in the Feur household. First, she notices Mary sobbing uncontrollably and trying to hide from her husband when he returns home from work. Then, one night she sees the husband put in a giant bag into the car, large enough to fit a person. Her observations for the next few days lead her to believe that the husband has killed his wife, and her beliefs are only heightened when she believes there's ghost inside her house trying to tell her something. I'm trying to be a little vague about the film, simply because it's a lot better not to know the plot twists and turns. The trailers gave too much away, and thus led me to correctly predict the film's big plot twist even before I actually went to see the movie. But that isn't the movie's flaw, and I'm sure that the twist would be surprising for the uninitiated. This is Robert Zemeckis' first foray in this genre, and he does a superb job. Even though the jump scenes-of which there are a huge amount of-may seem a little obvious, it's only Zemeckis paying homage to films of the past. And when they're as well-executed as it was in this film, those scenes can be very effective (lots of people actually screaming in the theater). Zemeckis also creates one magnificent set piece involving a bathtub (you'll know when you see it). This is the sort of sequence that reminds me of Brian De Palma, in which camerawork, the acting, and the situation itself-little to no special effects-are all that's used to create suspense. I've noticed a lot of complaints about the finale, which some found interfered with the tone and pacing of the previous 110 minutes. The film was derided for switching from a ghost story to something similar in Fatal Attractions. There is some truth in that, but the finale is also thrilling and suspenseful, thus lessening any sort of true negative impact it might have had if the scenes were less competently executed. The only two performers who are given a substantial amount of screen time are Harrison Ford and Michelle Pfeiffer, and both are terrific. Ford as the loving husband is always convincing and Pfeiffer as the woman who thinks she could either be going out of her mind or actually witnessing a supernatural phenomena is equally good. The film is really hers, though, since she's the one that does the investigation while the others have doubts about what she's saying. The supporting performances are from Joe Morton as a pyschiatrist and Diana Scarlid as Claire's best friend are decent, though neither are given a lot of screen time. James Remar as the husband who may or may not have killed his wife is chilling in the scenes he does appear in. The amount of critical bashing What Lies Beneath received leads me to believe that some people view this movie with too much of a harsh eye and need to believe that every film of this sort absolutely has to be unpredictable. To some respect, I can agree with the critics who say the first 2/5 of the movie is perfunctory, but only to a certain point. This is a far too enjoyable thriller for me to criticize substantially. Clark Gregg's script doesn't have an ounce of originality in it. The storyline is quite reminiscent of last year's Stir of Echoes. But originality really doesn't matter that much in comparison to how well it's executed. And in the case of What Lies Beneath, you have a very well-crafted thriller that was easily one of the best films of summer 2000 in a season of weak entries.