"Why? Why? Why?" That's what you'll be asking yourself the whole time. Why is the head bad guy doing what he's doing? Why are the bad guys following the head bad guys orders? Why did they run over the one woman? Why did they cast the bad woman and the cousin to look so much alike? Why is the title "Queen of Sin"? She was clearly not a queen of sin. Maybe a pawn of sin. She was more concerned about the one bad guys wife than her own idiotic fiancé. Of which he reminded me of one of Elaine's stupid boyfriends from Seinfeld. Why did the woman run up to the second floor to escape instead of breaking a window on the ground floor when she had the chance? I could continue this review with many more "why's" but it would be too long then and you'll get bored. The biggest "Why" would be "Why did I watch this stupid movie?"
15 Reviews
More risible than thrilling
biljao25818 July 2020
Production and technical features are above average for a TV movie. There's a moderately engaging story surrounding the heroine Posey (Christa B Allan) but it really falls apart as a thriller. It's clumsy and hackneyed with formulaic bad guys and big plot stretches. The actors ( some of whom are worthy of better things) must have been laughing up their sleeves in the more preposterous scenes.
I really wanted to like this..
klaushutchinson13 September 2020
Nothing about this movie was convincing at all. Such a mismatch of characters. Obvious plot and full of plot holes. I only kept watching because the lead, Christa B Allen, was hot. Other than that, stupid on so many levels.
Decent production values conceal a Z-grade thriller
grantss5 July 2019
I should have known better. The basic plot summary alone indicated that this wasn't going to go well, but yet I watched this. Initially it went well: a fair amount of intrigue and a slick production made me think this might actually be worth watching.
However, it quickly became apparent that this was your average Z-grade thriller, just dressed up as something better. Plot becomes nonsensical, performances are poor: there's nothing going for this.
Avoid.
However, it quickly became apparent that this was your average Z-grade thriller, just dressed up as something better. Plot becomes nonsensical, performances are poor: there's nothing going for this.
Avoid.
Terrible story - sleazy and boring
phd_travel23 September 2018
Some ridiculous scheme where a strange pair kidnap women for the pleasure of a high end client.
The story is meaningless and unconvincing.
It's a shame Christa B Allen has to act in something like this - she was a prime time actress in Revenge.
Don't watch this one.
The story is meaningless and unconvincing.
It's a shame Christa B Allen has to act in something like this - she was a prime time actress in Revenge.
Don't watch this one.
Worst film ever
astrikt10 April 2019
Um... What?
hrabakmargot20 February 2021
It's good..but one aspect is beyond dumb.
brandonlewissmu9 March 2021
I saw it on Lifetime but I'm assuming this wasn't an "original". None of the familiar faces. Not their typical tame script. It's nothing that will blow you away but it's miles better than most movies on Lifetime (even though I do love me some mindless Lifetime). The one thing that was mind-blowingly bizarre was (stop reading now if you haven't seen it) how she still liked the guy and looked heartbroken when he died. Even wore the bracelet he gave her...the dude was part of an awful group of murderers who trafficked women..what the hell was the writer thinking?
Stop complaining and know a good movie when you see it.
jacobjohntaylor125 June 2019
This is a great movie. Do not lesson to the hater reviews this movie has a great story line. It is very scary. It has great acting. Even the people do the ratting. I mean 5 out of 10. Come on. Stop underrating this movie. I give it 9 out of 10.
Some of these reviews seem a little harsh... For a made-for-basic-cable thriller, it's pretty good
theskippr228 May 2021
I've seen this movie a few times on Lifetime, yet I always seem to watch it again if I see it coming on (under the name "Dangerous Seduction"). I'm a fan of the old school cheesy Lifetime movies, so I don't always have the highest bar for their stuff, but this one is actually better than most--probably bc it wasn't made for Lifetime! Christa B Allen (Charlotte from Revenge) did a good job in the lead role of (the ridiculously named) Posy Pinkerton. The story doesn't fall into one of the 3 standard Lifetime storylines--it has a little darkness to it, while still keeping it "basic cable ready". Overall it has pretty good production value for a made-for-tv movie and (if you're willing to suspend your disbelief a bit) it has a decent plot. After reading other reviews that say it's the "worst movie they've ever seen", I have to assume these people have not watched many movies bc there are plenty of stinkers out there--this isn't even close to the worst movie I've watched just this week! It's not gonna win a freaking Oscar, but if you want to watch a decent little made-for-tv thriller on a random Thursday, this movie gets the job done.
Don't read the bad reviews
gottalovet-15 October 2019
Posing a Problem to Posey Pinkerton!
lavatch11 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
A real problem is posed to Posey Pinkerton. She is a talented medical artist with a great career ahead of her. She is also dynamic and effervescent in her personal life, but lacks confidence and has a fiancé, an M.D., who is not very passionate. Posey needs a spark in her life!
Unfortunately, the spark arrives in the figure of Jack Wilkey, a charmer who is linked up with a nefarious creature dealing in human trafficking. Posey becomes an unwitting victim and endangers the life of her cousin, Laura (Lo) Pinkerton as well.
The best moment in the film was when Posey drew an imaginary sketch of herself as a biker. When the figure in the sketch gives her a big wink, Posey moves into action to change her life!
The filmmakers worked effectively in the film's fast pace, and there were good outdoor locations as well. Detective Dagliesh was an intriguing character, who had an attraction to Lo. The creepy and repellent villain, Alexander Gorser was oily beyond belief.
Kudos as well to the actress playing Posey Pinkerton. She created a character with some depth who slowly breaks out of her shell. If only she had taken a different jogging route, her transformation might have been more smooth.
Unfortunately, the spark arrives in the figure of Jack Wilkey, a charmer who is linked up with a nefarious creature dealing in human trafficking. Posey becomes an unwitting victim and endangers the life of her cousin, Laura (Lo) Pinkerton as well.
The best moment in the film was when Posey drew an imaginary sketch of herself as a biker. When the figure in the sketch gives her a big wink, Posey moves into action to change her life!
The filmmakers worked effectively in the film's fast pace, and there were good outdoor locations as well. Detective Dagliesh was an intriguing character, who had an attraction to Lo. The creepy and repellent villain, Alexander Gorser was oily beyond belief.
Kudos as well to the actress playing Posey Pinkerton. She created a character with some depth who slowly breaks out of her shell. If only she had taken a different jogging route, her transformation might have been more smooth.
Lynch-esque attempt at deconstruction. Troubled but definitely way more original than most "well-done" examples of its genre
muratmihcioglu8 July 2022
Okay, now... I watched this last night on Rai2, dubbed in Italian. Before doing so, I had a peek at the IMDb reviews and was almost gonna skip. However, I did not. And made it till the end, which I'm glad I did.
Is it because this was a gem? No. Far from being a gem. But it HAS the elements there, the very ones that CAN make a movie a gem. Let's break it down a bit:
The camera work in the opening scene was great. It captured me. Had the film opened in a more traditional way, I could have stopped right there. But there was finesse in how the whole deal was handled, which made me take the bait.
I can totally understand that, half an hour into the film, most people can feel scammed and quit in despair. Because, yes, the construction of the scenes look more like rehearsals shot with a bunch of stand-ins rather than the actual actors. With the exception of the lead, almost every character was miscast. Seriously. I don't recall ever watching a film that made me think that way.
Problematic on every single level BUT still watchable because you see it there - whoever penned the script, whoever directed it, they had in mind some kind of surrealistic, character-driven puzzle in which the pieces are moving in unexpected directions.
But the execution is so poor in terms of finding the correct locations, casting the right people and handling the loose ends of the plot that, you get to watch how they are "describing" the movie in their mind, rather than watching an actual, finished work.
The alter ego of the lead character does play a role in what goes on. However the guy playing opposite her does not look at all like what the part requires.
Normally, such an attempt at a movie should not deserve more than a 6. But seeing that most reviewers on here are missing the point and judging the whole effort only by the failures, I feel like elevating it a bit, hence the 7.
That said - I totally understand why someone would rate this with a 1. Yeah, it does suck so bad when you take the angle of perfection. But I believe intentions also matter, and that it was more of a low budget than a lack of creative effort that made this one go down.
Work on the same script for a day, cast an A-lister as the evil guy, and some better known character actors for the supporting cast, see to it that you have visually striking locations key scenes (like where the guy offers her cake) and you end up with a "critically acclaimed" piece of art.
It's a very fine balance and the effort does deserve some admiration.
Is it because this was a gem? No. Far from being a gem. But it HAS the elements there, the very ones that CAN make a movie a gem. Let's break it down a bit:
The camera work in the opening scene was great. It captured me. Had the film opened in a more traditional way, I could have stopped right there. But there was finesse in how the whole deal was handled, which made me take the bait.
I can totally understand that, half an hour into the film, most people can feel scammed and quit in despair. Because, yes, the construction of the scenes look more like rehearsals shot with a bunch of stand-ins rather than the actual actors. With the exception of the lead, almost every character was miscast. Seriously. I don't recall ever watching a film that made me think that way.
Problematic on every single level BUT still watchable because you see it there - whoever penned the script, whoever directed it, they had in mind some kind of surrealistic, character-driven puzzle in which the pieces are moving in unexpected directions.
But the execution is so poor in terms of finding the correct locations, casting the right people and handling the loose ends of the plot that, you get to watch how they are "describing" the movie in their mind, rather than watching an actual, finished work.
The alter ego of the lead character does play a role in what goes on. However the guy playing opposite her does not look at all like what the part requires.
Normally, such an attempt at a movie should not deserve more than a 6. But seeing that most reviewers on here are missing the point and judging the whole effort only by the failures, I feel like elevating it a bit, hence the 7.
That said - I totally understand why someone would rate this with a 1. Yeah, it does suck so bad when you take the angle of perfection. But I believe intentions also matter, and that it was more of a low budget than a lack of creative effort that made this one go down.
Work on the same script for a day, cast an A-lister as the evil guy, and some better known character actors for the supporting cast, see to it that you have visually striking locations key scenes (like where the guy offers her cake) and you end up with a "critically acclaimed" piece of art.
It's a very fine balance and the effort does deserve some admiration.
To Tease or not to tease - Innocense on display
kosmasp22 March 2021
A movie made for TV ... I think it sort of shows. But still considering that, it is quite the neat little thriller. If you thought though that 50 shades of grey was to tame (lame?), then don't even think about this one. There is teasing, but considering all this is about it is not as horrific as it could be.
Maybe I shouldn't have compared it to 50 shades ... and I wouldn't mean that story wise anyway. It is more about the sexual awakening of the main female character. Being innocent, yet curious. That may sound more exciting again than what is being shown in the movie. Do not expect this to tickle that .. whaever you want to call it. It is mostly a thriller, that teases a lot ... for better or worse does not go through on some/most of it
Maybe I shouldn't have compared it to 50 shades ... and I wouldn't mean that story wise anyway. It is more about the sexual awakening of the main female character. Being innocent, yet curious. That may sound more exciting again than what is being shown in the movie. Do not expect this to tickle that .. whaever you want to call it. It is mostly a thriller, that teases a lot ... for better or worse does not go through on some/most of it
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
