whpratt1 It was very enjoyable watching this film and trying to figure out just what direction the director was taking the audience. Rebecca DeMornay (Ruth),"Backdraft",'91, was very attractive and very sexy as a suspecting wife and went to all kinds of expense to trap her husband in any way that she could. Michael Rooker(Matt),"The Replacement Killers",'98, tried to satisfy two wives and I must say he did a pretty good job of making both of them smile and laugh at times! Mark Rolston(Tom),"Blade Runner",97, Ruth's next door neighbor soon got the hots for her and turned out to be quite the lover. If you love Rebecca DeMornay and good acting by Michael Rooker and Mark Rolston, this is a must see film. The actors must have had their LAUGHS acting in this film!

MsDivine This movie was much better than the mainstream "hand that rocked the cradle." The story and the good acting is what kept me watching this movie. I liked it because all actors had unique characters. Rebecca's character as the lonely housewife whose husband leads a double life, is one that was portrayed very well. Michael Rooker as the manipulative 2 timing husband who tried to fake his own death. And of course the killer who lived next door. This movie was packed with drama, suspense and what I would refer to as dark comedy. I don't mind that this came straight to video. It's not easy for some to watch movies that stay away from the mainstream. I give this movie a perfect score!

eandekiess My wife and I both really liked this movie. Think of it as a Tom and Jerry or Roadrunner cartoon. It is obviously over the top in believability, but it is FUN to watch. DeMornay's charater's booby traps are straight out of the Rube Goldberg school of complicationicity. Rooker's double-life husband is lifted directly from the letters to Dear Abby and Ann Landers. Throw in the wild card next door neighbor(s) and what do you have? Video Hoo Ha. Ethel (my wife, my name is Ed) and I have rented and rerented it. The plot is as goofy as anything the old Warner Brothers animators could have concocted. We took it as a black comedy the first time we viewed it and, with that in mind, enjoyed it more each time after. (Oh, jeez, did I end a sentence in a preposition?) Think funny, and this film will work for you.

Ankhoryt Oh, yuck. Like Lemos (see his comment), I watched this because there was nothing better to do -- though I'm glad I saw it on cable and didn't pay for it. And also like Lemos, I agree that Ms. DeMornay is wonderfully seductive, with scenes in this movie nearly precisely like those in which she enchanted Tom Cruise and the rest of us in "Risky Business" so long ago. What a shame she can't get better roles! Must she *always* play a prostitute? (sigh) Well. Not her fault that Hollywood wants her naked or not at all.The worst thing about this movie was not its misuse of DeMornay, but rather its misuse of viewer time. Yes, she plays a nut, and is very convincingly nutty. (And yes, the movie complies perfectly with the Hollywood Rules for Mental Illness: if female, the person must be either an elderly hag who eats garbage, or a gorgeous young nymphomaniac).But as convincing as DeMornay is, the plot just is NOT. There is no way that one, much less two, adult men would be interested in this goofball for more than a single sweaty half-hour. Both of the men are not-quite-right-in-the-head either, but the writer (who is also the director) gave them the dignity of being both less conspicuously nude and less conspicuously nuts than the female character.Summary: a little sexy, a little creepy, a lot boring, and even more annoying. Unless DeMornay is your particular dream girl, don't waste your time.