Shadow of Fear

They say that Hollywood always is looking for something new. So how come they decided to produce this film? There's nothing new in "Shadow of Fear". I mean: rainy night, a moment of inattention and the dead guy in the middle of the road. There rest is as unimaginative as the beginning.

Well, there were some positive moments. The concept of the secret society created by demonic William Ashbury is quite entertaining and relationship between main character and his father-in-law is somewhat original. But that's it. The main character is rather dull and Matthew Davis isn't the best actor for the part. What's more, Lexi Nikitas must really hate him, since his make-up was overdone. What's with the lipstick? Davis looked almost like a lazy drag who didn't remove the make-up after the show was over.

I'm surprised this movie has got such a high rating. It starts out very promising with some nice images in the rain. In fact, it is extremely fascinating about until the time when he gets back to his wife and they begin talking. After that the movie falls apart little by little, until it becomes so borderline non-sensible that I just had to turn it off. It is not a matter of "plot twists" as some viewer suggested. Obviously, it is a question of just not being able to put a decent plot together. I see an alarming trend in the new DVD-market where many movies are put out quicker and easier to DVD than it was possible in the good old video days. American horror has suffered in recent years, and did not improve with the pathetic remakes of brilliant Asian horror. Anyway, "Shadow of Fear" is not a horror-movie. It is hardly even a movie. If it had only lasted until he got back to his wife, and she then turned into a demon or something; then it would have been a good "Twilight Zone"-episode but when a movie-plot collapses like that in one superfluous scene after the other then it becomes irrelevant to watch. As one viewer suggested, we are never told what this "organisation" does. I think, this is a major problem. On the back of the DVD it said something about a secret "cult"-organisation with big power. It sounded promising but in the movie this organisation seems completely devoid of power, so what's the point?

"Shadow of Fear" draws upon the elements of suspense from the famous genre of film noir. It also shares similarities to films from earlier decades in "The Brotherhood of the Bell" (1970) and "The Star Chamber" (1983). All three films focus on a secret male society that goes outside the law to protect the interests and advance the agendas of its members. I admired director Rich Cowan's camera angles and stylish cinematography in "Shadow of Fear." There was also good suspense sustained in the mysteries activities of the secret club.

At the heart of the action is the character of Harrison French, admirably played by Matthew Davis. Harrison is caught in a web of intrigue after an unfortunate incident of manslaughter while driving in a blinding rain. He is subsequently manipulated by the ringleader of the secret brotherhood, performed with great relish by James Spader. The cast is rounded out with veteran actors Peter Coyote and Aidan Quinn, along with good support from Robin Tunney, Alice Krige, and Lacey Chabert.

Beyond the effective and suspenseful plot, I was especially intrigued by the consistently morose and clinically depressed cast of characters. Despite the great affluence portrayed in the film, the main characters all suffered from guilt for their past conduct and by the obsession of keeping their skeletons in the closet, through assistance of Spader's oily attorney, William Ashbury. It is especially revealing when throughout the film, the protagonist Harrison is chomping on prescription antidepressant medication in order to cope with even the slightest setback.

In "The Brotherhood of the Bell" and "The Star Chamber," the secret society went outside the lines of society's ethics in the pursuit of such concepts as "truth" and "justice." By contrast, in "Shadow of Fear," there were no redeeming ideals as the members of the society sought only to cover up one another's past transgressions. Literally, no one seemed happy in this film. Not even the powerful attorney Ashbury could remedy their sorry state of depression.

"Shadow of Fear" has some pretty good production values for a low budget direct to DVD movie. It also has some decent acting by the various participants on the screen. Unfortunately, it's hard to build any enthusiasm for the rest of the movie. The story elements and the characters are often so murky that it's hard to understand what is going on at times. It's like starting a novel at chapter 3, since a lot of the elements in the movie movie go are never explained at all. Some elements are (eventually) explained, but much of the movie remains confusing. What went wrong here? Since I find it hard to believe that production would go ahead on an incoherent screenplay, I suspect that the original cut of the movie ran a lot longer, and when the movie was subsequently cut down to run at a more reasonable length, a lot of explanation was removed. It's too bad, because there are signs that the original cut would have been engaging despite its length. You'd be better off waiting for a director's cut instead of watching the movie as it is right now.

Rick Cowan's "Shadow of Fear" showed up on cable recently. The only thing that attracted us to watch it was the presence of James Spader, Peter Coyote and Aidan Quinn, perhaps the best known actors in the cast. This film written by Matthew Hollaway and Arthur Marcum, will test even the most patient viewer's patience! First of all, the screen play is vague in explaining what we are watching.

The opening sequence shows us Harrison sitting near the table where his father-in-law and his cronies, presided by the creepy William Ashbury are discussing things that probably Harrison can hear, yet, he is not invited to participate in the discussion. He is given a drink, but when he goes to pay, the waiter shows him that it's already been paid by Ashbury. He then goes home on a rain storm. The moment he gets distracted, he hits the man standing in the middle of the road. What to do? Call the police? No, instead Harrison disposes the body not too far from the road, a move that will carry terrible consequences for this young man.

This being said, sounds like the premise of a good mystery film, but instead, the writers have complicated the story in such a way, that at times, one wonders with incredulity all the twists and turns in a plot that doesn't ultimately prove anything at all. By not making clear the activities of the group, we start losing interest in the film, and nothing that is done later on to explain why everything happened makes sense.

James Spader doesn't add anything to his otherwise excellent career in the movies. Ditto for Peter Coyote, Aidan Quinn, and the rest of the cast. Matthew Davis who is at the center of the story appears to be miscast for the role of Harrison. Perhaps with a stronger lead could have made more sense.