'In the Deep Woods' had the ingredients for a tight, relentless and interesting thriller, but director Charles Correll's sinuously pedestrian handling and Robert Nathan and Robert Rosenblum's material (adapted from Nicholas Conde's novel) piles on the red herrings and all too convenient developments. Is it actually someone that you're seeing on screen or will there be a split off down the road that takes it into another direction? That's what makes this certainly above average for a lifetime movie, with decent but not great performances, and it's a film that you can watch, enjoy it for what it is then move on and forget about.īack to back, from one decent TV thriller ('Through the Eyes of a Killer') to somewhat another. The film keeps you guessing as to who the killer is, and just as you're sure that it's one person, more clues are dropped that points the finger towards someone else. The reason that Arquette is being stalked by Perkins is a bizarre twist, related to her brother who is made the top suspect.

Arquette is a friend of one of the victims and at her funeral, meets detective Will Patton who is on the case. The attraction here for me is a presence of Anthony Perkins in his last film, playing a mysterious man following artist Rosanna Arquette during a time when women are being brutally tortured then murdered then their bodies found in the woods. Who wants to waste time on all these lack of qualities? On occasion, something breaks through that makes it interesting, you do care about the fictional people on the screen, and the film keeps you enthralled in spite of the film's overall weakness.

Not a fan of lifetime movies as a rule as there's a formula to them, tons of cliches, weak writing, B casting, unlikable characters and predictable conclusions.

In the deep movie ending