A reporter witnesses a brutal murder and becomes entangled in a mystery involving a pair of Siamese twins who were separated at birth, one of them forced to live under the eye of a watchful, controlling psychiatrist.
A young doctor goes home with a dazzlingly beautiful young woman he meets while volunteering at a party for children at a Vancouver mental health clinic. The next day is her birthday (as well as that of her twin sister, her unseen flatmate). After a night of lovemaking, the young doctor goes out in search of a cake. Meanwhile, a reporter who crashed the kids' party breaks into the office of the physician in charge of the clinic, only to witness a murder on a closed circuit television in the doctor's office. With the help of an investigator, the reporter pursues the truth, which eventually takes her back to the clinic. Does her own past hold the key to what she'll uncover?Written by
This film is a remake of Sisters (1973). See more »
In one of the memos Grace found in Dr. Lucan's office about Sophia Tristiana's mental state, there are four spelling errors in just two sentences: "validatity" for "validity"; "there" for "their"; "diagonsis" for "diagnosis"; and "abillties" for "abilities." See more »
Remake of the Brian DePalma thriller didn't cause that much bickering among fans when it was released because most people still don't know it exists. The film has a reporter (Chloe Sevigny) witnessing a murder by a mysterious twin (Lou Doillon) but when the police arrive on the scene there's no blood and no body. The reporter then starts to investigate the woman's doctor (Stephen Rea) and soon begins to unravel the secrets. This remake of SISTERS certainly isn't as good as the original but the nice cast and a good start are quickly ruined in a needlessly insane second half where everything just unravels. The first hour is pretty much exactly like the previous movie so if you've seen it then it's doubtful any of the plot points here are going to throw you. I found the opening hour to be a fairly well-made thriller because the director at least kept everything moving at a nice pace and the three lead actors were doing so well that it helped keep your attention. Then, the final thirty minutes just go crazy in terms of wanting to shock you and come up with bizarre story lines that just never make much sense. It should go without saying but any movie made after THE SIXTH SENSE needs that "shock" ending. I'm guessing the filmmakers didn't think the DePalma version had a big enough of a shock (I'd disagree) so they decided to take the story into new directions. The only problem is that the twists here aren't shocking and what they've added to the story just doesn't work. I won't spoil anything but we get all sorts of scenes where characters just sit down with the reporter and begin telling her about what really happened. I always find scenes where we have characters sitting down to explain things bad writing because it's obvious the film is lost and they just need to keep moving along so they try to fill us in on everything we've missed. What direction they take the doctor just doesn't work, comes off forced and at times it's almost laughable. Outside of that this is a pretty solid little thriller that cranks up the violence, sex and nudity. That's the one big adjustment over the DePalma version as this one here features a little more dirty moments and the reporter has an added backstory that actually works well with the twin's story. Sevigny can always be counted on for a good performance and she manages to bring a lot to the role of the reporter. I thought she was believable in the role and certainly helped keep the movie going at a good pace. Doillon is also extremely good in her part as the twins. I was a little shocked to see Rea in a movie like this but it was still nice to see him after all these years. Fans of the DePalma movie really don't have much of a reason to watch this unless they simply want to compare the two versions. I'm sure if you're unfamiliar with the original version then many of the story lines here will throw you for a loop but if you haven't seen either one then it's still best to go with the original first.
4 of 10 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this