Reviews & Ratings for
Deceived More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Index

29 reviews in total

---

25 out of 28 people found the following review useful:
An attractive mystery with some drawbacks., 5 October 2002
Author: Poseidon-3 from Cincinnati, OH

Hawn, in an attempt to shed her giggling, airheaded screen persona, chose to make this rather dark thriller. In it, she plays a woman who meets a charming man (Heard) by chance and is soon married to him and enjoying a life of bliss and parenthood (to adorable imp Peldon) while dealing in ancient treasures and jewelry. One day, he finds himself in danger of incrimination for a forgery and from there, the plot takes off in hyper-unreal twists and shocks. Hawn, despite some viewers' carping that they couldn't accept her in this type of role, is excellent. She gives a fully committed, intriguing performance. Heard is also extremely effective in his part. They are both damaged by a script that is just too difficult to fully buy and riddled with plot holes. That said, the film is still quite entertaining as an experiment in audience manipulation. More than once, spine-chilling moments of surprise and terror jolt the viewer, no matter how many times they are viewed. The film is geared for audience reaction, but, unfortunately, the logic of the plot doesn't hold up. It hangs together pretty well for the longest time, then gets way out of hand and is all too typical of the thriller films of this era. There also seems to be evidence of cuts (note the billing, but virtual absence of Straight and Robertson as Hawn's parents and the sudden disappearance of underused Bartlett from the story, though she is fourth billed.) On the plus side is a sumptuous and rich-looking production design and a haunting, exceptional music score from Thomas Newman. Newman uses the lower notes that his father found so useful, but creates a modern, unique sound. Fans who can let go of Goldie's PREVIOUS image should find enjoyment in the film along with those who just like to get jolted. Fans of water-tight, intelligent mysteries are in for a let-down. Sadly, Hawn hasn't really attempted to break the mold again since this, joining people like Bill Murray ("The Razor's Edge") who have had immense trouble breaking free of preconceived notions about their area of talent.

---

17 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
A Decent Thriller, Although Not Hard To Figure Out, 2 May 2006

Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a pretty scary movie in parts with some good camera-work. It's exciting to see a mostly hidden face in the shadows or an eye peeping out of a crack in a doorway, etc. Both lead actors, Goldie Hawn and John Heard (now there's an odd couple!) give credible performances. Hawn is the innocent wife and Heard the deranged killer who uses several identities.

Unfortunately, guessing some of the identities - - particularly the third - isn't that hard and it can lessen some of the suspense for the viewer near the end. There's a nice a chase scene at the end, too. As a male, I get tired of the bad-husband routine Hollywood was particularly enamored with around this era. You know, the "Sleeping With The Enemy" stereotype.

Nothing super, but a passable thriller for one look.

---

14 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Goldie tries a thriller, 12 July 2006

Author: Wayne Malin (wwaayynnee51@hotmail.com) from United States

Dark, somber thriller about an art restorer Adrienne (Goldie Hawn) meeting Jack Saunders (John Heard) and falling in love. They marry, have a kid and are happy--until 6 years (or so) into the marriage he's suddenly killed. Slowly Adrienne discovers her husband wasn't who she thought he was...

Sort of a film noir. Hawn decided to take a chance on a dramatic role. Unfortunately this film fizzled at the box office and Hawn herself later said she made a mistake. I actually like the film. I liked it in 1991 and I still like it now 15 years later. It's got an intricate plot and some very nice directorial touches (some of the scenes were beautiful). Love their apartment too. There was also a very unusual but effective music score and a few nice jolts in the movie too.

The acting varies. Heard is VERY good is his role. Unfortunately Hawn isn't in hers. She's somber, quiet and too restrained. She seems very uncomfortable in the role. She doesn't ruin the movie but she lessens the impact--maybe it's a good thing that she never tried this again. Also I noticed quite a few plot loopholes left dangling after the movie was over. Still I found this engrossing and well-made. Worth catching. I give it an 8.

---

14 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
A slow thriller that picks up momentum and ends with wow!, 20 November 2001
Author: franklin_phraner from Alameda, CA

Don't read any of the criticisms until you've seen the movie. This is a fun ride if you just sit back and enjoy the first half hour of preparation. You may feel the urge to quit watching... don't. Goldie Hawn is a wonderful character actress. You might think that the story is implausible but in N.Y. everything is possible. Keep this mind and enjoy!

---

6 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Formulaic, but watchable..., 26 October 2006

Author: MarieGabrielle from United States

Goldie Hawn has never been a favorite, I must admit, but that is all the more reason to catch her in the one performance where she is not quirky, superfluous or silly.

The theme of this story has been done before, but thanks to a fine performance by John Heard, the character of Jack Saunders is intriguing and foreboding. John Heard is an underrated actor who adds a somewhat mischievous, ominous and sometimes comical overtone to his roles (You may want to watch him in the earlier 1970's film "Chilly Scenes of Winter", and there was also a film short wherein he portrayed Fortunato, in Edgar Allen Poe's "Cask of Amontillado". He was excellent).

Look for Ashley Peldon as the young daughter; Robin Bartlett, who is underused as Heard's estranged mother, and Tom Irwin, as Hawn's colleague from the art museum. The mystery is enough to keep you watching, and overall Heard's performance makes it all worthwhile. 7/10.

---

6 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Thriller starring Goldie Hawn and John Heard, 5 August 2006

Author: blanche-2 from United States

Adrienne and Jack meet, fall in love, marry, have a child, and live in a wonderful New York apartment. Then Jack is killed in a car crash. Slowly, things start to unravel for Adrienne in "Deceived," a 1991 film starring Goldie Hawn and John Heard.

This is a highly derivative movie concerning fake museum pieces, fake identity, and a double life, but it manages to be exciting and occasionally scary. As other people have commented, there are plot holes aplenty. Hawn and Heard are both marvelous in their roles, Hawn for a change in a serious part. She shows she's as talented a "straight" actress as she is a comedienne. The final big scene will keep you on the edge of your seat, and the climax of it is a knockout. This could have been one of the great movies if the script had been tighter because it is very well directed and performed with some excellent camera work and great music.

Despite script holes, I still found it entertaining. I wouldn't have minded paying good money to see it in the theater, and it makes a riveting rental.

---

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Goldie in a Great Serious Role, 19 January 2000
Author: Petunia-2

Goldie Hawn dropped her bubbly personality to play the serious role of Adrienne, who is happily married, living in an upscale apartment, and has a lovely little girl. Jack Heard plays her devoted husband, Jack, or is he? As Adrienne's world crumbles, Goldie really makes you feel for her. I cannot describe details of the movie without giving away too much for the first-time viewer; it is one of those movies that after you see it once, you cannot watch it again for awhile because you know all twists and turns in the script. I will tell you this; Goldie is terrific in comedies and she was terrific in this one--she did a lot of acting with her eyes and gestures with her body; soon the viewer is on her side and aching to find out what is really going on. Jack Heard plays a good s.o.b. Robin Bartlett, best known for her turn in tv's "Mad About You" only has a few lines, just like in "City of Angels" and as usual, Robin's performance stays with you after the film has ended. Great acting by all; my only complaint is that the film is a bit too long.

---

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
watch out who you marry, 23 April 1999

Author: helpless_dancer from Broken Bow, Oklahoma

This is one of Goldie's finest. She played a woman who marries a man and has a perfect marriage for many years. Then one day she discovers something unusual about him. Very tense ending, I was on the edge of my seat. Watch this one alone, in a dark room, late at night.

---

6 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Goldie Hawn proves she is an actress., 13 April 2002

Author: fgunther (fschaer@nyc.rr.com) from Brooklyn, NY

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The plotting is banal, the usual "husband is not who he pretends to be, and *possible spoiler* fakes his own death to escape being caught".

But the concept has rarely been executed better, and Goldie Hawn is simply outstanding here, with a truly fine supporting cast. The suspense builds logically from one step to the next, with an absolute minimum of contrivances. I was totally absorbed, especially as the "widow" slowly unraveled her husband's deceptions. Possibly the best scene in this movie was when she *possible spoiler* confronted her husband's pregnant new "wife". It was done superbly, with an absolute minimum of phony dramatics.

Too bad the ending couldn't have been done better, but, with the exception of those last five minutes, this film is well worth the effort of seeing.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Way too formulaic and uninteresting., 30 July 2008

Author: Boba_Fett1138 from Groningen, The Netherlands

This movie was way too formulaic for me to enjoy. It's a very standard thriller by the numbers, that basically doesn't feature anything new or surprising and is one that is like hundred of other genres movies, especially like those made around the same time period.

The movie is not just bad because it's so formulaic, it perhaps is even more due to the fact that the story is just so predictable. Seriously, the big twist? Who didn't see that one coming? It's no surprise, it's predictable and you just wait for it to happen. The movie often also gets quite ridicules. The 'villain' of the movie is basically the worst conman ever. He makes some gigantic mistakes and just does things that make no sense what so ever for the movie its story. Some sequences are obviously put in there to make him look evil but its so pointless all and adds nothing to the story. The movie also made me think like; 'Why didn't the Goldie Hawn character just called, or had gone to the police'. Seriously, there were several occasions in the movie that she could had easily convinced the police of her findings but instead she puts herself and her little daughter needlessly in danger.

It's not like this movie is completely horrible or anything but for a genre piece it isn't anything special enough. It's the reason why you're still better off not watching this movie, even though you most likely won't be bored when you still do so. Even though the story is just bad and filled with way too many questions and plot holes, it's still a fast moving one. The movie feels much shorter than it in fact truly is.

And yes, Goldie Hawn is a good actress but to she seemed out of place in this movie. She of course also isn't helped much by the movie its lacking script. She's just too naive at times and for no reason very cold and distant to the people she herself went to for help, to unravel the movie its 'big and shocking' mystery. The movie just doesn't always make you like her, or care about her character enough. The movie would had also been better of if they didn't cast John Heard. Not that he's a bad actor but it would had made the story perhaps a bit more surprising and at least not as predictable as it is now, if they had cast a more unknown name for the role. Besides, John Heard is a sort of actor that often seems to play the same type of roles in movies and also his looks never seem to change, not even now when he's getting older.

Perhaps only watchable once but even then it's a forgettable one.

5/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

---

---

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
External reviews	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history