Nowhere to Hide

Few performers can claim to have made two unrelated movies that make a perfect double bill; Rosanna Arquette made "Nowhere To Run" in 1993, and the following year she starred in "Nowhere To Hide." Now, she has done some good TV projects - "The Executioner's Song," "Promised A Miracle" and "Son of the Morning Star" come to mind - but this is closer to "Poison" and "I Know What You Did" on the quality scale, alas.

From the opening scene with Rosanna and Max Pomeranc (as her son) engaging in the least convincing piano miming in screen history, you know you're not in for a quality watch; the basic storyline had possibilities - a soon-to-be-divorced woman (Miss Arquette) finds out that her soon-to-be-ex wants to kill her, and goes under the protection of FBI agent Scott Bakula - but the actual movie is so spectacularly dull that it took me three tries to get through it, something no movie with Rosanna Arquette has ever required me to do. (Not even "Off The Wall.")

You don't get much in the way of action, or even emotion, though it's unusual to see an American movie actually have Vancouver play itself for once instead of standing in for various U.S. cities (though it does that here as well). Bakula's too stiff to make an impact, and though Rosanna tries hard you get the impression she doesn't care much for the script... not that you can blame her. It's not until towards the end that it remembers it's supposed to be a thriller and throws in a couple of genuinely surprising plot twists, but by then it's too little too late. Call it a missed opportunity; a good storyline ruined by bad execution.

Executive producer Stan Rogow's other credits include "Lizzie McGuire." An animated version of Rosanna Arquette supplying commentary would have enlivened this 'un no end.

Well OK, it's a made for TV movie and it was showing on Lifetime Network so with all that aside...I'm just a Bakula fan. I have a Tivo search for Bakula showings and this auto-recorded. Actually, not a bad story at all if you can tolerate the Arquette family and a too-neat wrap it up kind of ending.

I enjoyed most of the movie's progression and I agree with the last comment post that the the kid's character was as oblivious as dry toast. However one can see he wasn't the center point of the movie other than the plot point that she was a perfect mother with total dedication to her only child.

This would have made a fantastic novel if the last five minutes of the movie were stretched out over a few chapters involving a long, drawn out set up. The TVM seems to be edited down to "we've only got five minutes left so wrap this thing up quick". It was a good movie to satisfy my Scott Bakula in a romantic role fix on a slow day.

Average mystery where a young and beautiful woman (Arquette) and her son are harrased by his ex-husband after the divorce. Afterward, enter the police and finally the FBI that offered special protection for the lady in distress because her ex-husband would be a great boss in the ranks of the organized crime in America. But is it the true? Good premise and so-so development completely marred by a simple and unconvincing ending. I give this a 5 (five).

This one's improbable but likeable, and as good or better than most made-for-TV movies, largely thanks to Rosanna Arquette.

There are some nice touches and a sense that everybody was doing their best to make it work.

When the complicated twist was revealed, I looked at my watch and saw the movie had about 10 minutes to run. Like others here, I wondered how the hell are they going to resolve all this? They sorta did, and sorta didn't.

I guess Rosanna Arquette just moved on to the next project and maybe never even saw the final cut of this. Whatever, she delivered a solid, honest performance.

Finally, I know I'm being pedantic, but it was an episode of "The Lucy Show" the kid was watching, not "I Love Lucy".

Oh a vaguely once famous actress in a film where she plays a mother to a child . It`s being shown on BBC 1 at half past midnight , I wonder if ... yup it`s a TVM

You`ve got to hand it to TVM producers , not content on making one mediocre movie , they usually give us two mediocre movies where two themes are mixed together and NOWHERE TO HIDE is no different . The first theme is a woman in danger theme cross pollinated with a woman suffering from the pain of a divorce theme which means we have a scene of the heroine surviving a murder attempt followed by a scene having her son Sam ask why she divorced ? And being a TVM she answers that the reason is " That people change " rather than say something along the lines like " I`m a right slapper " or Your daddy cruises mens public toilets for sex " as does happen in real life divorce cases . And it`s young Sam I feel sorry for , not only are his parents divorced but he`s as thick as two short planks . Actually since he`s so stupid he deserves no sympathy because he`s unaware that a man flushing stuff down a toilet is a drug dealer , unaware that you might die if someone shoots at you , and unaware that I LOVE LUCY is painfully unfunny . If only our own childhoods were so innocent , ah well as Orwell said " Ignorance is strength " . Oh hold on Sam is suddenly an expert on marine life ! Is this character development or poor scripting ? I know what one my money`s on . And strange that Sam the boy genuis hasn`t noticed that if the story is set in 1994 then why do people often wear clothes , drive cars and ride trains from the 1950s ? But as it turns out during a plot twist it`s the mother who`s the dummy . Then there`s a final plot twist that left me feeling like an idiot for watching this