Revenge (2000) Poster

(I) (2000)

User Reviews

Review this title
9 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
equal to network TV movies
Bob712 April 2000
Reviewer Chris had it about right, it's ok but about the level of a network TV movie. It's about being double-crossed by your spouse, and moves along ok, without any real plot twists. If you're usually happy with TV movies you'll probably like this, but if you're looking for more, skip it. -Bob
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Flat and Uninteresting (and that's not just the victims)
MissTRious7 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I have the dubious honour of actually owning this film on DVD (don't ask; it was the a case of a bottle of red wine, credit card and amazon.com). Well, it's not the worst money I have ever spent, but it does come close.

The story is a stock "revenge" story, which actually tells you all you need to know. Woman wronged seeks retribution on the guilty parties. The movie tries to be clever with a "surprise" twist at the end, but if you have ever seen any movies like this in the past, it won't be that much of a surprise.

As for the cast: Alexandra Paul (Laura Underwood) is way too butch as a woman (actually she is probably the most masculine officer in the Police House). The whole beginning "fantasy" arrest (as commented on by a previous reviewer totally NOT realistic) sets the mould for her character. No nonsense, no romance, no personality.

Vlasta Vrana (Dan McCartney) plays the role-reversal as Laura's partner. Although being male and older, he plays dumb to her clever cop. And yet has the dubious honour of extolling pseudo-Confucius like gems of wisdom and witticisms (on the death of one guy he utters the immortal line "guess he was coming as he was going" - how did this escape the Oscar nomination panel!?!).

Anthony Michael Hall (Brian Cutler) Laura's "love interest" (bit of a misnomer) is hardly seen through the film and doesn't really have the chance to shine. Oh and the surprise.... is not a surprise (you'll see what I mean).

Michelle Johnson (Vicky Mayerson) the eponymous "Fallen Angel" again another character given no opportunity to develop and flesh out. Suddenly appears, does the deeds and then goes. The motive is given but to say it's weak is an understatement.

So, in summation, a poor movie, not unwatchable but only just.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A mediocre serial killer drama
seandchoi24 September 2000
Fallen Angel tries to be a "serial killer thriller" but it just ends up being as flat and limp as a wet noodle. Michelle Johnson plays Vicky Mayerson, a serial killer who's determined to kill every man who picked on and assaulted her one fateful night long time ago, when she was still in high school. Former Baywatch babe, Alexandra Paul, plays Laura Underwood, a detective who's out to bring Vicky to justice. This film's plot has the general outlines of a potentially good crime drama but where it goes wrong is in the specifics of execution, namely, in writing, directing, and acting. The dialogs of this film are incredibly cheesy and at times borders on camp. For example, in one scene a detective says concerning a victim who died while having sex, "I guess he was coming while he was going." Ah...yeah. Whatever. Another example: In a ten year high school reunion a woman says to a fellow graduate, "Like, it's been ten years!" Exactly. That's why they call those things ten year reunions. Also, the acting in Fallen Angel is either way over done (i.e. egregious overacting, e.g. Alexandra Paul, Michelle Johnson), or just plain flat and without any emotion (e.g. Anthony Michael Hall--who appears to be under heavy sedation throughout this film). I didn't care about any of the (poorly developed) characters in this film and I really didn't care whether they lived or died. The serial killer is dumb and her victims are even dumber. As I see it, this film would have worked if it had taken a "no-holds-barred-campy" approach. Instead, this is a dull and languid film that is self- deluded into thinking that it is exemplifying fine cinematic art. The killer in this film offers advice to her victims just before she finishes them off: "Never trust a man after midnight."
0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good and better than a tv movie
chris-47429 August 1999
Alexandra Paul surprised me in this movie. She was a lot better than what she was in Baywatch. The story is simple and interesting and isn't boring. I think this movie went straight to video which I can understand but rent it if you see it.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One of the worst films I have ever seen
aroussil15 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The other comments that rave about this pathetic attempt at filmaking must be members of the cast's families. I had to view it till the end, hypnotized by disbelief. It's a serial killer story like Clint Eastwood's "Sudden Impact". Typical of poor writing, it requires the good guys to have a collective IQ under 20 otherwise the feature would be ten minutes long. Everything is telegraphed from beginning to end. The detectives are continuously behind a very stupid criminal who would have been caught by the lowliest real detective. People are dropping like flies under the most suspicious circumstances, they know the originating incident and everything is virtually lying in front of them, but they just can't figure it out. Also indicative of very poor writing, the characters ore full of attitude without anything between the lines. I would use this film to show film students what not to do as it contains all the errors a filmmaker can make. To top all this, It has that glossy stilted, commercial, TV, Canadian, Kodak film stock look. There is a complete lack of attention to any kind of detail. It's really hard to know where to start on this lemon. It always amazes me that you can actually finance such crap without anyone noticing.
2 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Much better than I expected.
fgunther12 November 2002
In spite of some obvious flaws, notably an over-the-top villainess (whom I still found myself rooting for), this film kept my total attention from start to finish.

Negative note: why does anyone cast Anthony Michael Hall as anything other than a corpse in a box?

The storytelling is good, the direction crisp, and Alexandra Paul is a pleasant surprise to me (sorry, I never watched Baywatch or Melrose Place - to me, Tom & Jerry cartoons had much greater entertainment value. Hey, what can I say? I'm a guy).

My recommendation: kick back, relax and enjoy. It's better-than-average entertainment, and didn't strain my aging brain cells. And Alexandra is very easy on the eyes.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Great movie
slush-326 February 2000
I thought the movie was pretty good. It was nice to see Alexandra Paul in a starring role. She did an excellent job of carrying out the movie herself and looked great. The movie was not as predictable as I thought. It has some twists and turns that really surprised me. Watch it if you can!
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A different and pretty cool Michelle Johnson.
peterdao17 June 2003
During the ten years that followed her successful debut as a hot teenager in "Blame It On Rio" opposite Michael Caine (1984), Michelle Johnson didn't seem to get lucky on any role she landed (including her double role in the not-so-cool thriller "Body Shot"). Then she got married to baseball star Matt Williams in early 1999 and was given another chance in "Fallen Angel" (aka "Revenge"). However, don't expect to find a sexy, curvy Michelle Johnson who once feasted your eyes and captured your heart in "Blame It On Rio". I first thought this was an erotic thriller myself. But Vicki Mayerson's bitter revenge is totally different from Jennifer Lyons' dangerous seduction, so to say. Nonetheless, director Marc Grenier deserves all the credit in making this B-thriller surprisingly entertaining. I enjoyed its good screenplay and cinematography, plus some nice acting by Michelle Johnson and (oh yes, believe it or not) Alexandra Paul (the Baywatch girl). Furthermore, since "Fallen Angel" aka "Revenge" has its plot based on the animosity of a young girl who survived a teenaged gang's careless prank, the flashbacks are well calculated to gradually unravel some dark secrets that lead to a dramatic and believable ending. Not a waste of time, compared to many senseless flicks that are labeled "thrillers" out there.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Standard mystery/thriller, but ending is exciting
vchimpanzee3 April 2007
At the start of the movie, Philadelphia police detective Laura Underwood helps deal with a domestic dispute. She shows the type of cop she is--in real life, what she does wouldn't be proper procedure. Instead, the scene is more of a fantasy for abused women.

Laura doesn't want to go to her 10-year high school reunion. but she may have to; two of her male classmates have died from falling off tall buildings. She is the one who makes the connection between them, and because there were two similar deaths, foul play may be involved.

We already know the murderer is a beautiful blonde (who may be wearing a wig; at the very least it couldn't be anyone's real hair color). What we don't know is who she is or why she is killing. Or who will be next. We learn all of this as the cops do, and it's interesting to watch the process. We do see very brief flashbacks of a violent past event as the murders take place. The event is later shown in its entirety, and while well done, it's quite disturbing.

Brian is Laura's former boyfriend, and he wants a future with her as well. Tom, Gary, Ron and Scotty are some of Laura's classmates. Kelly organized the reunion and is entirely too cutesy for this type film. Jimmy is another of the detectives, and I couldn't help thinking of him as being like Jimmy Olsen, since Laura reminds me of Lois Lane. Not Erica Durance's or Teri Hatcher's, necessarily, but just the general image of the tough but attractive career woman with brains and skills for investigating.

Alexandra Paul is certainly pretty, and she looks good in shorts or a short dress. She has some good moments as an actress here, but I wouldn't say she shows consistent talent.

Michelle Johnson gives the standout performance here, deceptively sweet at first, in a manner similar to a hooker or stripper, before she reveals her true intentions. She doesn't come across as really wacko, but she is a pleasure to watch, in a demented sort of way.

Vlasta Vrana also gives a good performance as Laura's partner. At least I think that's what he is. He is so much older sometimes I thought he was the chief.

There are some boring romantic scenes, but the primary plot provides quite a bit of excitement, especially toward the end. At the same time, there's nothing really special here. And real cops probably would have had an easier time catching this troubled woman.

The violence isn't graphic, though one scene shows quite a bit of blood. It's that past event that led to what we see that would be the biggest reason for parents to be concerned. At the same time, this is fairly tame for a murder mystery.

I've seen better mysteries, but this isn't bad.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

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


Recently Viewed