MovieChat Forums > Single White Female (1992) Discussion > Entertaining, but one-dimensional with a...

Entertaining, but one-dimensional with a tedious third act

posted 5 years ago by Wuchak (8837)
13 replies | jump to latest

"Single White Female" mixes elements of "Fatal Attraction" with the setting of "Rosemary's Baby." It's not notable like the former, but it's on par with the latter and arguably superior. The film possesses a haunting ambiance, which is assisted by the venue -- a vast Gothic Manhattan apartment building -- but this same attribute eventually hinders the movie by making it one-dimensional. "Rosemary's Baby" had the same problem.

The fact that the two stars regularly appear in various stages of undress is titillating, yet this can't make up for the one-note tone and locale. Still, the movie's entertaining enough, but the third act is overlong and curiously tedious despite the slasher thrills.

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

Disagree completely. Rosemary’s Baby is basically a perfect film, and Single White Female is a highly effective psycho-thriller that almost ranks alongside Misery.

[–] Wuchak (8837) 4 years ago

They're also hindered by a one-dimensional approach, but if the viewer doesn't mind practically the entire story taking place in old New York City apartment buildings, then they'll probably appreciate them.

Speaking of "Rosemary's Baby," it's a good thing Polanski limited that satanic gathering at the end to about 1 minute or viewers would've died laughing.

I'd watch the TV movie "Bay Coven" (1987) any day over that flick. It's a similar story, albeit made on a fraction of the budget, and all-around superior (definitely more succinct and less tedious). https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092623/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0 But if you love "Rosemary's Baby" more power to ya.

[–] Drooch (5333) 4 years ago

Most people love Rosemary’s Baby becuase it’s basically a perfect film, Polanski’s pinnacle for sure.

What do you mean by ‘one dimensional’ and what does that have to do with the films mostly taking place in New York apartment buildings?

Thanks for suggesting Bay Coven, unfortunately your taste in film is atrocious so I’ll humbly pass on your recommendation.

[–] Wuchak (8837) 4 years ago

"Rosemary's Baby" isn't a bad film, it's just overlong, the setting is too one-dimensional for a flick that runs well over two hours and Mia Farrow isn't charismatic enough to carry a film IMHO. Meanwhile "Bay Coven," despite its low budget, doesn't overstay its welcome, has a superior setting and Pamela Sue Martin blows Mia out of the water. Sure, Polanski is technically the better filmmaker, but what good is that when his film is marred by these glaring issues? If I'm in the mood for Polanski I'll reach for "Tess," "The Pianist," etc.

[–] Drooch (5333) 3 years ago

It’s not ‘marred by these issues’. Your lack of taste is causing you to misinterpret the significant merits of Rosemary’s Baby as flaws, that’s all.

[–] Wuchak (8837) 3 years ago

Lack in taste of what -- practically the entire (overlong) story taking place in an old New York City apartment building with the un-charismatic Farrow as the lead character, not to mention the nigh giggle-inducing satanic gathering at the end (e.g. "Praise Satan")?

But, like I said, if you regard it as a masterpiece, that's fine with me. More power to ya.

Speaking of which, since I already said that a year ago, why are you still arguing with me? I never said "Rosemary's Baby" didn't have artistic merit; I just pointed out the issues I have with it. Obviously they're not issues with you and I'm totally cool with that. Not everyone is going to gush over the same movies.

[–] Mustang (5524) 3 years ago

That was kind of standard for 90s films. They are reliable entertainment without being anything amazing.

[–] Wuchak (8837) 3 years ago

I agree with that assessment -- reliable entertainment without being anything amazing (except maybe the two female leads).

[–] Mustang (5524) 3 years ago

I love 90's films for that reason. They aren't trying to be anything but entertainment. I still get more value out of those films than I do out of most recent ones. The latest Ghostbusters film had that element of old school in it, it was just entertainment, not an amazing film but I liked it.

The female leads in this were well cast, they both look like girl next door types. I think it makes it more eerie than if they cast two Playboy models etc.

[–] Wuchak (8837) 3 years ago

Yeah, I tend to prefer the girl-next-door types, but I don't mind Jaclyn Betham-types now and then.

[–] pepetoony (1757) 8 months ago

This movie definitely shit the bed as soon as the killings began. It could've been an excellent thriller without jumping the shark like that.

[–] Melton (5038) 7 months ago

The killings was when the story levelled up, they were shocking and great, and it made sense since Ally was clearly a ruthless psychopath who murdered her twin sister.

[–] BKB (10678) 8 months ago

I thought this movie was thoroughly entertaining that didn't require a sequel, but you know Hollywood?? The premise was unique and the nudity thoroughly gratifying from Bridget Fonda. I own this on Amazon PRIME