So props to him for expanding beyond just acting (I remember him from soaps), but the title is completely misleading. I'd read the reviews and a couple of summaries before watching, so I knew who the villain was, but even with that information, I wouldn't say the movie ever made me think it was him. It was obviously not the mom, because why would the mom kill a teenager? And IF it were the mom, how would the ex-gf have escaped being terrorized to the point where she was still friendly with the family? Why would she want to be? She did mention that the mom liked her more when she wasn't dating Karl, but that doesn't justify why she'd want to be around the family much less helping with the wedding. The only one with constant motivation was XXXXXX.
And what weak motivation it was. When they do these incestuous villains (be it adopted or step), they never explain how it turned into romantic obsession. I feel like that's owed to the viewers. I also think that this movie had senseless deaths. It's so lazy for these thrillers to just kill people like they're trying to make a quota. Not to mention that whenever people die...no one cares! That is a running theme with these movies. High body count...yet no one cares or grieves. I thought it was in poor taste for the last two victims since everyone decided to "deal with them later," so not to interfere with the wedding. Completely tasteless and made me less sympathetic to everything going on. Literally nobody ever questions how in the WORLD three people ended up dead in just days.
A couple of a lame bits: whenever someone has allergies, you know it's only a matter of time. Not only that, but their epipens are always compromised. The one time in a movie that the allergy trope truly "worked" was the tragic scene in My Girl. Unless it's played for laughs, allergy scenes are cliche because an important (most of the time the lead) character is never really in danger. (this is why it worked to our shock and horror in My Girl). Another annoying part was Deanna not knowing how to swim. Why do people who can't swim get on boats, and then wear no life jackets?
I'm really tired of villains not getting what due them. This particular villain killed five people and attempted to kill more.
And what weak motivation it was. When they do these incestuous villains (be it adopted or step), they never explain how it turned into romantic obsession. I feel like that's owed to the viewers. I also think that this movie had senseless deaths. It's so lazy for these thrillers to just kill people like they're trying to make a quota. Not to mention that whenever people die...no one cares! That is a running theme with these movies. High body count...yet no one cares or grieves. I thought it was in poor taste for the last two victims since everyone decided to "deal with them later," so not to interfere with the wedding. Completely tasteless and made me less sympathetic to everything going on. Literally nobody ever questions how in the WORLD three people ended up dead in just days.
A couple of a lame bits: whenever someone has allergies, you know it's only a matter of time. Not only that, but their epipens are always compromised. The one time in a movie that the allergy trope truly "worked" was the tragic scene in My Girl. Unless it's played for laughs, allergy scenes are cliche because an important (most of the time the lead) character is never really in danger. (this is why it worked to our shock and horror in My Girl). Another annoying part was Deanna not knowing how to swim. Why do people who can't swim get on boats, and then wear no life jackets?
I'm really tired of villains not getting what due them. This particular villain killed five people and attempted to kill more.