Whispers in the Dark
August. 06,1992 RPsychiatrist Ann Hecker is ending one relationship and possibly starting an important new one, while finding that some of the sexual exploits her patients relate are weighing on her. Turning to a married friend from her research days for guidance, she finds his help increasingly important when a female patient is murdered and it turns out that her new boyfriend was also seeing the dead woman.
Similar titles
You May Also Like
Reviews
Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.
One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.
This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable
(Spoilers) I have to agree with all the negative analysis posted already. Saw this movie on cable last night and it was disappointing (but hey I watched the whole thing).First, it was obvious Alan Alda would be the killer. He was too interested in the psychiatrist and kept meddling in her life. But like every transition in this film, he was revealed in a totally heavy handed way. And how believable is it that he was totally obsessed with her for years, was killing people to protect her, and then when she says he is frightening her that is enough for him to instantly snap and try to kill her on the spot in a rage? Boy he sure got over that crush in a hurry! After committing all these clever crimes he admits to the murders in front of his wife and immediately smashes a wine bottle over her head. How was he going to deal with that? Also, she was such a poor psychiatrist, the best she could do was immediately reveal her revulsion and run away in fear? Not an ounce of cleverness in dealing with an obvious psycho who she knew was in love with her and who she could have manipulated.The way she discovers he is obsessed with her! He tells her to go in the music cabinet to put on a song and there he has his audio notes of all his sessions with her neatly labeled so that she, his wife, anyone, can pick it up and hear him saying he is obsessed with her. The tapes themselves were as corny and unbelievable as his coming back home and just hearing her playing them at full volume.When I say disjointed, the quirks of the detective, the female patient, the boyfriend are never explored they were just weird characters who didn't really fit in the movie. Were we supposed to care about Paglia's detective? Was he attracted to her? All of a sudden we're watching a troubled cop movie (briefly) as if this were a different movie.After Leguizamo obviously thought it was her behind the mirror (Paglia absurdly keeps showing her pictures through the glass and asking her rhetorical questions about psychoanalysis) they just let him go and surprise surprise, he next appears at her place to take revenge. And no one saw that coming? Then we have Leguizamo who has spent his life torturing women, has her tied up and he cant do a thing to her, suddenly we are supposed to sympathize with his troubled character and of course she is completely worried about a psycho who moments ago hog tied her.This is the kind of film that is so cheesy, so illogical, so obvious you really wish they would give you all these stars and a budget and let you make the film because yes most people would have insisted on doing a better job. This was a real waste of potential.Parting shot, the closing scene of her so happy with the boyfriend as if this were a happy ending to a romantic comedy, trivial fake conversation between two people with no chemistry, didn't even need to be in the film. The boyfriend wasn't an appealing character, was too old for her, and it was like saying hey if this movie wasn't corny enough, let's make you watch several minutes more of something pointless between two people who were never believable in their parts.
I agree with the comment that the ending of this movie is hilarious, unintentionally, of course. This is one of those films that is so bad that it is good because of its stupidity. The mystery isn't that mysterious and the sexual aspect of the story goes nowhere. Annabella Sciorra's character does the usual ridiculous things common in suspense films and its really hard to identify with her character because the screenplay has her come off as whiny rather than a professional therapist. If the film would have explored its sexual underlying theme and why Sciorra's patients act the way they do, then we in the audience would care why they are being killed. In addition, make Sciorra a feisty and intelligent therapist rather than one who trusts the wrong people then mopes later. But again,as stated before in a previous comment. Hold on to your hats for the over-the-top hoot of an ending. It is funny, ridiculous and pathetic all at the same time. This is right up there with Besty Palmer as Mrs Voorhees (Friday The 13th) as the funniest ending of a suspense/horror flick ever. Invite your friends, tell them its a comedy, because it really is!
If only the role Annabella Sciorra played hadn't been given the profession of a shrink, then her role in this awful, quasi-erotic thriller in the vein of BASIC INSTINCT would have had a more engaging approach. But shrinks getting themselves into a lot of unwanted heat and possibly even death by some unpleasant way was the raison d'etre of many "thrillers" capitalizing on the success of Paul Verhoeven's smash hit between 1992 and 1994, respectively, and this was one of the worst of the bunch.The premise isn't bad. Actually, it's a distant relative in its elements to the premise of Anais Nin's "Spy in the House of Love" and in Marguerite Duras' "Moderato Cantabile", just with an update to bring a strong sensibility to the erotic mores of the times and the necessary potboiler plot that looked like something Joan Crawford could do in her sleep in the mid-Fifties when her career consisted of women falling for the wrong guy and being in mortal harm from their ulterior motives and unpredictable mood swings.The problem herein lies not in the story itself but in the mode of execution. The introduction of the thriller mode in which a troubled woman is killed had been done with better success. If not, all one needs to do is take a peek at DRESSED TO KILL where Angie Dickinson's character, in looking for sex with a stranger, found quite a wallop but of something nastier in the place she least expected, and from the last person on Earth whom she would have guessed capable of such a thing.The key phrase is "the last person on Earth ... capable of such a thing." It's a problem for thrillers because it sets up the viewer for a "surprise" which may or may not work. I don't like surprises, when it involves a character revealing him or herself to be the baddie all along and doing their own impression of a Jack-in-the-box, complete with a "Gotcha!" moment. It's too easy, it's the oldest trick in the book ("Maybe... the butler did it," quoted a certain butler from Robert Altman's nearly flawless 2001 movie GOSFORD PARK, but with a wink in the eye), and one that even a movie as exploitative as BASIC INSTINCT was knowingly playing on as bait with its tongue firmly planted in cheek.No. I don't care for those surprises. It's what made me deny ever going to M. Night Shyamalan movies once it became patent and not actual cleverness in action. I want something more textured, a person's reaction to another person's dysfunction which may or may not have a conclusion, and even if there is the subject matter of a killer on the loose... why not play it up for the hell of it and perhaps let the story surprise the creator, and ultimately, the viewer? It's too bad. WHISPERS IN THE BARK, a title closest to romantic-suspense of the Avon category, falls apart at the seams and reveals it was a poorly built structure all along. Not a single performance can save this movie, and what the hell is Jill Clayburgh doing here of all places? Where did her career go, for crying out loud?
This movie is proof that the ending of a movie can ruin the rest. Not that the rest was great, but the ending of this movie was completely ridiculous. The story seemed to be going somewhere mildly interesting, but the filmmakers decided that they should risk it all to make sure no one could figure out the ending. It seemed as though the writers were not pleased with the direction of the story with about a third of the movie left and threw the curve-ball of Alan Alda. The scene at the dinner table, where he comically hits his wife in the face with a bottle was received with a chorus of laughter in the theater. It was all made better by the shot of Alan getting his skull punctured. One of the worst movies I have ever seen.