Communist Radicals hijack Air Force One with The U.S. President and his family on board. The Vice President negotiates from Washington D.C., while the President, a Veteran, fights to rescue the hostages on board.
Norman Spencer, a university research scientist, is growing more and more concerned about his wife, Claire, a retired concert cellist who a year ago was involved in a serious auto accident, and who has just sent off her daughter Caitlin (Norman's stepdaughter) to college. Now, Claire reports hearing voices and witnessing eerie occurrences in and around their lakeside Vermont home, including seeing the face of a young woman reflected in water. An increasingly frightened Claire thinks the phenomena have something to do with the couple living next door, especially since the wife has disappeared without apparent explanation. At her husband's urging, Claire starts to see a therapist; she tells him she thinks the house is being haunted by a ghost. His advice? Try to make contact. Enlisting the help of her best friend, Jody, and a ouija board, Claire seeks to find out the truth of What Lies Beneath.Written by
Eugene Kim <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The list of missing persons found on the Internet by Claire (Michelle Pfeiffer) includes many people who worked on this movie. Jennifer Euston (casting director, uncredited) Kenneth Farnell (driver, uncredited) Ellen Faustine (transportation office coordinator) Harry Frierson (set dresser) Elizabeth Gabler (producer, uncredited) Ted Gagliano (post-production executive, uncredited) Colleen Gibbons (travel coordinator) Jan Ellen Goldstein (assistant location manager) Patrick Gomes (paint foreman) Nancy Gomes (paint supervisor) See more »
During the final sequence, Claire is obviously wearing dark red or pink underwear underneath her night gown. Later on, they turn white. See more »
Somewhat like a homage to the thriller and horror genre, and especially Hitchcock. This movie is kind of very involved, thats why you can watch it again, because there are things about it that you want to re-see and want better explained, not that it isn't a complete viewing the first time around. It truly is a refreshingly new scare.
Zemekis refined the visual effects in this one, a huge mistake that was made with 99s 'The Haunting', basically because effects aren't scary especially when they make up 90% of the films scare crop. This one does have some effects and some very evident CGI effects but the way they are used is superb.
The first half of the movie is a red herring which is how it manages to keep your attention and the baddies confession is done in 3 diferent stages. Zemeckis uses the same ocean-blue look in the movie as he did with 'The freighteners' some time ago only this is a much higher achievement. It is in some way unsatisying that you can't forget it all after the first time so that you can go unsuspecting into it again.
I would have title this the pinacle of haunted house movies. As you will find on every review page we have the usual suspects presenting no or illogical cases for the negative, I guess I should be used to that by now but I still can't help groaning when I see "what's all the fuss about", one of the most common phrases on the database. Don't bother reading comments with a summary like that they just go on to either state what is a good quality and call it bad or just stuff like "dont watch it", "utterly ridiculous", "I personally hated it" which give no case to be considered.
Watch this one whatever you do and have minimal light hanging about the place, you will not be disappointed. It deserves no less than a 9.
4 of 4 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this