Heart of Stone (2001) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
A nice thriller
Niv BS (NivBS)28 July 2002
There's nothing new here: a guy, killing gals and other guys, blah blah blah... But this movie is none the less interesting, and actors and actresses are good, and the storyline is more or less intriguing. But still, it's a thriller with no uniqueness.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Another one
insomniac_rod24 July 2005
Man I feel cheated. I watched this crap on Cable labeled as "College Girls Massacre" and because of my huge appetite for horror movies I decided to give it a try. Well, I watched another erotic thriller with lame death scenes but I have to admit it, decent sex scenes. Most of the death scenes are off screen and you can see little of the weapons of choice but it doesn't makes a difference because this movie is all about the SEXY blonde Angie Everheart. She is the best thing about the movie. I liked her cynical phrase with a sweet voice "last night was amazing but I have to go now". Well the that night she had it hard.

Oh well give it a try but only if it's on cable. Don't waste a single dollar on this.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The movie that made me pity James Wilder
MBunge27 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Well, I can sincerely say that this film was not the worst thing to come out of 2001. For the first eight months of the year, though, Heart of Stone had to be in the running. A stupid movie made for stupid people, this pitiful attempt at a thriller boasts an "R" rating and 4 separate sex scenes with Angie Everhart, yet she doesn't even go topless in any of them. Do I need to say any more than that? This thing was made many years, many flops and many bad performances after Everhart's unexpected star turn in Jade and these filmmakers still making her the star of their production without requiring her to show some skin perfectly demonstrates that they didn't know what the *bleep* they were doing. This is the sort of poorly executed nonsense that makes you think "James Wilder deserves better than this". James Wilder, for gosh sakes.

Right out the gate, the audio quality of this motion picture is garbage. Given the technology available in 2001, forget about today, that's a totally inexcusable flaw. The soundtrack is clear but all the dialog is muddy and muddled, like the actors are talking through a thick cloth. How did someone not notice that after the first day on set? Was the sound guy connected to the mob or something? It's so bad that having a bunch of Welsh street urchins redub everyone's lines would have been an improvement.

Mary Sanders (Angie Everhart) is married to a rich, impotent doctor (Peter J. Lucas ) and has a daughter (Tracy Ovist) just heading off to college. Mary becomes the obsession of a clearly disturbed man (James Wilder) who seduces her once and then refuses to leave her alone. Meanwhile, a serial killer is slaying young co-eds in an inexplicably involved manner. He kidnaps them, lets them think they've escaped and then slays them. The killer is being pursued by an even more inexplicable quartet of cops. I mean, I understand the two lead cops (Gregor Toerzs and Joel Bissonnette). I don't understand why you'd ever cast someone with Gregor Toerzs' German accent in this kind of role, but if you've got a murder it only makes sense to have the police show up in the story. But why are there two more cops (Scott Mckinlay and Vince Marinelli)? They're in several scenes. They've even got actual names that are spoken aloud. But they are completely superfluous. Heart of Stone was never going to be, you know, good or anything, but the first thing anyone with half a brain would have done after reading the script once is eliminate those two extra, awkward and unnecessary roles.

The authorities come to suspect Mary's stalker of being the killer, so he coerces her into providing him with an alibi. Mary tries to get him to back off by sending her husband's most inexplicable brother (John Duerler) to rough him up. I say "most inexplicable" because Peter J. Lucas has an unmistakable European accent. It's not quite as bad as Toerzs', but there's no way he can pass for your average American. John Duerler has no accent at all and there's no effort made to explain the difference. I first I thought the relationship was that Mary was sister to the wife of Duerler's character, but that wasn't it. Forget about the fact that Lucas and Duerler look about as much alike as Dick Cheney and Kanye West. Forget about the fact their characters have as much in common as Mr. Rogers and Jack the Ripper. How in the name of Mel Blanc did these filmmakers not at least tell Duerler to cop some sort of accent like Lucas'?

Anyway, the attempt to scare him off fails and Mary's stalker winds up kidnapping her daughter. The cops uncover evidence that the killer is the stalker and rush in to save the day. But wait! Can you believe the killer is someone else? Clearly, the folks who made Heart of Stone believed they were really throwing the audience a curve with that one but they were sadly, pathetically wrong. Your average house fly could figure out who the killer is before this film is 15 minutes old.

There are a couple of naked boobs here and Wilder does an okay job with a horribly written part. That's all Heart of Stone has going for it. From atrocious sound to hideous plotting to camera work so amateurish it looks like they could only afford to do one take and had to use it no matter how bad it was, "thoroughgoing disaster" is too kind for this film. Don't even think about watching it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Well executed idiocy
jefffy6 January 2013
Really? 6.0 on IMDb? There is a new serial killer in town and a housewife gets in trouble with her unplanned extramarital affair. The plot thickens, those things intertwine, we see some nice boobies, justice is served in the end, blah, blah, blah...

Despite this it could still be at least a semi-decent film.

But it isn't.

This film is a real insult to an intelligent viewer. The whole plot is idiotic, the so-planned twists are not only foreseeable but totally unlikely as well. Most of the acting is pretty darn wooden, the only exception being those of Everheart's and Wilder's. The audio is terrible, luckily on the DVD there was a very clear foreign language dubbing available so choosing that I understood more. Interestingly the score was quite decent, maybe the best of all departments. Lame, lame cops; lame storytelling, lame victim behavior (doing _nothing_ of what you should do), lame everything.

So many idiotic moments that if you have seen at least 30 thrillers/suspense movies in your life and if you have an IQ above 100 and at least some expectations for a movie to deliver, than you will be scratching and shaking your head so many times that it won't even make a good enough, forgettable popcorn movie.

It's not the worst film of the world, maybe it was the worst of 2001. What makes it more unbearable for me that even with a 2 million dollar budget and the score it has, and also the two main character's acting it could have been a decent, a real 6 or 7 film given a better screenplay.

All in all I give it 3 for the score and for Angie's and Wilder's role. Oh, and for the boobies. If you have nothing better to watch this might fill the void but if you do have expectations it will upset you more than entertain.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
OK But Predictable Co-Ed Murder Flick
GSiessel14 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This is the type of film that one would experience in a Grade C movie. There are many twists and turns but you will see through to the conclusion long before it arrives. The basic premise, used several times before in other movies, is "Is he guilty or isn't he?". The problem I had was that too many clues were given in this movie instead of trying to be suspenseful.There are some erotic moments but these are overshadowed with a "rape scene in the shower" and with the males trying to be in control.

Similar in vein to David DeCoteau's sexy/horror films with the acting on the same level. Most of the acting is mediocre, EXCEPT James Wilder who delivers a really convincing stalker performance. It seems he was the only one that cared about their performance in this film. You know who the victims are going to be so there is no guesswork there. Do not rent this for an intellectual thriller, you will be disappointed. Even so, this is a good popcorn movie for an afternoon's entertainment.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews