I actually enjoyed this movie, but the same lazy plot holes and ridiculously stupid decision making (particularly by the victim of course) plague this film like so many others. I find it odd why so many film makers (whether producer, writer or director) decide it best to have their protagonist lack any common sense whatsoever, and why there must be scenes that defy all logic and reality.
The first blatant head scratching moment came after Jules survived the scene at the cliff. I was able to look past that, but to see her doing full sprints through the woods a day or so later was just over the top. It would take weeks, if not months to recover from the injuries sustained from what happened to her.
But apparently the Director/writer/producer felt there wasn't quite enough disbelief for one movie. They decide to borrow from the cliches of every cheesy slasher flick ever written and have their protagonist / victim avoid every possible chance of escape, fighting back, or killing their attacker when the opportunity arrives. And in an ultimate act of stupidity, Jules decides after actually escaping near certain death, that it be best to return with a knife, knowing full well that Jackie is a marksman, that there are guns on site, that she is injured and at a severe disadvantage physically.
It would have been slightly more plausible if she had orchestrated some sort of plan, but instead she haphazardly and loudly burst through the door and roams the house where even the most inexperience of killers could have taken her out with ease.
The other oversight by the writers is having Jackie decide to make the lake her kill site, especially considering her association with another girl's death years prior. There were a couple scenes that indicated Jackie's strong attention to detail and measures taken regarding her killings, yet she somehow overlooks the fact that a coroner could easily notice the severe injuries sustained prior to the reported fall of her wife's supposed 'accidental' fall? Which combined with the fact two neighbors show up missing at the same time (one of whom was her best friend at the time their other friend 'drowned' in the same lake while swimming with Jackie?
Despite all of these oversights, I did still enjoy the movie. The acting was good, and the dynamic between the two women was convincing. I can also understand how people in abusive relationships can act without logic. I just think the movie could have easily been much better if not for a few basic oversights. One last gripe mentioned by another reviewer is how Jackie mentioned an insurance policy as the reason for her actions, yet in a later scene she hints towards other motives.
My reasoning for leaving critical comments in reviews is in hoping filmmakers read them and avoid the same pitfalls in their future creations.
The first blatant head scratching moment came after Jules survived the scene at the cliff. I was able to look past that, but to see her doing full sprints through the woods a day or so later was just over the top. It would take weeks, if not months to recover from the injuries sustained from what happened to her.
But apparently the Director/writer/producer felt there wasn't quite enough disbelief for one movie. They decide to borrow from the cliches of every cheesy slasher flick ever written and have their protagonist / victim avoid every possible chance of escape, fighting back, or killing their attacker when the opportunity arrives. And in an ultimate act of stupidity, Jules decides after actually escaping near certain death, that it be best to return with a knife, knowing full well that Jackie is a marksman, that there are guns on site, that she is injured and at a severe disadvantage physically.
It would have been slightly more plausible if she had orchestrated some sort of plan, but instead she haphazardly and loudly burst through the door and roams the house where even the most inexperience of killers could have taken her out with ease.
The other oversight by the writers is having Jackie decide to make the lake her kill site, especially considering her association with another girl's death years prior. There were a couple scenes that indicated Jackie's strong attention to detail and measures taken regarding her killings, yet she somehow overlooks the fact that a coroner could easily notice the severe injuries sustained prior to the reported fall of her wife's supposed 'accidental' fall? Which combined with the fact two neighbors show up missing at the same time (one of whom was her best friend at the time their other friend 'drowned' in the same lake while swimming with Jackie?
Despite all of these oversights, I did still enjoy the movie. The acting was good, and the dynamic between the two women was convincing. I can also understand how people in abusive relationships can act without logic. I just think the movie could have easily been much better if not for a few basic oversights. One last gripe mentioned by another reviewer is how Jackie mentioned an insurance policy as the reason for her actions, yet in a later scene she hints towards other motives.
My reasoning for leaving critical comments in reviews is in hoping filmmakers read them and avoid the same pitfalls in their future creations.