Amy Adams spies a convoluted Rear Window mystery in The Woman In The Window
Film Reviews The Woman in the Window
The story behind Joe Wright’s thriller The Woman In The Window is more intriguing then the film itself. The novel it’s based on, a bestseller in 2018, was written by a senior publishing executive with the express purpose of cashing in on the success of Gone Girl, The Girl On The Train, and their ilk; that marketing determined many of the “creative” decisions (including the author’s choice of pseudonym, A.J. Finn) was no secret. Then, in 2019, The New Yorker outed Finn (real name: Dan Mallory) as a serial fabulist who had, at various times, affected a British accent; faked a brain tumor, a cancer diagnosis, and an Oxford Ph.D; and impersonated his brother via e-mail, only to later claim that said brother (still alive) had committed suicide. It also appeared that he had lifted some elements of the book from a 1995 film ironically titled Copycat.
At that point, the film adaptation was already in the digital can. Reshoots—supposedly due to confused reactions at test screenings, but who knows—pushed it back from its original late 2019 release date to early summer 2020. But the pandemic intervened and thus this Rear Window take-off about a depressed, pill-popping agoraphobe who can’t leave her rambling New York brownstone came to be shelved at the exact moment where it might have feigned something akin to timeliness. Wasn’t that all of us about a year ago—stuck indoors, yearning to feel better, convinced that one of our neighbors had committed murder? No? Regardless, it’s here at last, intruding into our homes via Netflix, to be appreciated in its derivative glory.
To be fair, if anyone should be handling material this baldly recycled, it should be a technical showboat like Wright, who takes every opportunity to demonstrate that there is someone punching instructions to tilt and pan into the remotely operated camera head. In the opening moments, he sets the film’s baseline of artistic subtlety by tracking past a dollhouse and a TV that’s playing the climax of Rear Window frame by frame. (Later, it will play a clip of the dream sequence from Spellbound.) Wright wants us to know that he knows what he’s doing; the fact that he didn’t just put his film degree at the start of the movie in the manner of an old British Board Of Film Censors certificate shows impressive restraint.
From there, we meet Anna (Amy Adams), the aforementioned depressed agoraphobe. We learn that she is separated from her husband, Ed (Anthony Mackie); hasn’t left the house in 10 months; and used to be a child psychologist. Most of her contact with the outside world comes by way of occasional phone calls to Ed and scattered interactions with her handy basement tenant, David (Wyatt Russell). Otherwise, she spends her time mixing wine with her meds (with possibly hallucinatory side effects), watching old movies that she has committed to memory, and snooping on the neighbors.
As it happens, a new family, the Russells, has moved across the street, providing fresh material for Anna’s voyeuristic pursuits. The first one she meets face-to-face is Ethan (Fred Hechinger), the teenage son, who comes by to deliver a candle as a present. Ethan’s mom, Jane (Julianne Moore), appears next, coming to Anna’s rescue after a failed attempt to venture outside to shoo off some egg-throwing neighborhood kids. What she lacks in manners she makes up for with the kind of conviviality usually associated with addiction, and the two hit it off over drinks. Alistair (Gary Oldman), the man of the house, is the last to appear unannounced at Anna’s doorstep, seemingly trying to figure out whether his wife has been talking to her. By this point, a picture of the Russells has been formed: a free-spirited wife trapped in a marriage to a jealous, overbearing husband for the sake of the sensitive kid.
With the help of her trusty camera and zoom lens, Anna continues to spy on the drama playing out in the Russells’ dining and living rooms. Under the influence of a serious combination of alcohol and pharmaceuticals, she witnesses what appears to be Jane’s murder. (For whatever reason, she doesn’t think to take a picture.) A couple of incredulous detectives (Brian Tyree Henry and Jeanine Serralles) are called, as are the Russells, who appear with a completely different Jane (Jennifer Jason Leigh). Either our heroine is extremely delusional or there’s a very convoluted cover-up going on.
Watching the overqualified likes of Adams, Moore, Leigh, Henry, Oldman, et al. get tangled up in this gaslighting mystery is, admittedly, one of the pleasures of The Woman In The Window. Given that the script was written by actor-playwright Tracy Letts (who also plays Anna’s therapist), it should come as no surprise that the film works best when it shoots for grotesque black comedy—less an imitation of one of Hitchcock’s stage-bound experiments and more of a digital gloss on Brian De Palma, with some outrageous stylizations (eccentric camera moves, funky lighting) but none of the kinky and obsessive personal material that a De Palma would bring to his own forays into Hitchcockiana. As an exercise in suspense, it’s far less successful.
The problem is not an uncommon one: In order to resolve its plot—and overcome the traumatic backstory that has long been de rigueur for thrillers—The Woman In The Window must become the least interesting version of itself in the third act, complete with a rainy rooftop climax. The truth is that a great many better thrillers have stories that fall apart under close scrutiny, howling gaps in logic, and twists that strain credulity. They are filled with clichés, stereotypes, and formulas. These films sculpt art not out of plot but out of our attraction to the thrill. The most that can be said for The Woman In The Window is that does, in long stretches, look interesting.
51 Comments
I wonder how often publishing execs go “Fuck it, I can write a book too.”
Probably as often as someone who reads a book because it is a bestseller and thinks to themselves, “But this is crap.”
The thing that always baffles me about bad writing is… presumably this person has read a bunch of books; how did nothing about how professionals write actually manage to sink in?
Doing things like commenting on message boards has given me a new appreciation for writers, even people who do things like write copy for a living, just based on the number of times I’ve read what I just wrote and cringe at how wooden it is.What surprises me is how many wooden actors there are; I say if you’re gonna suck as an actor it’s a lot more fun to overact than underact.
Yeah, I’m not usually about the “good old days,” but I really miss “character actor goes utterly ham as the villain” being a standard B and C-movie thing outside comedies and throwbacks.Like, come on. Twenty years from now, mostly no one’s going to go back and watch yet another Alaskan murder thriller where people get killed with farm machinery unless it has someone making an absolutely ridiculous acting choice.
The Gone Girl knock off genre is one where you can really tell that these books are being written/bought based on premise by writers who know publishers will buy them.
I wonder how often publishing execs go “Fuck it, I can write a book too.” I guess not too often, which is good, because in this case… Joe Wright is a horrible writer, but… he got it published, got it publicized, and sold the fuck out of this one.
Wright wasn’t the book’s author.
Wright wasn’t the book’s author. Oh, damnit. Thanks for pointing it out. I knew the book was written by “A.J. Finn” but also knew it wasn’t his real name. I just re-skimmed the first paragraph and came up with Wright. Because I’m in a hurry, damnit! (Not really, but “in a hurry” sounds better than “a lazy dumbfuck”.
This Dan Mallory fella sounds very Donald Kaufmanesque, I want his biopic already.
Along with Rear Window and Copycat, the bit about the new wife makes me suspect that the 70s TV movie, One of My Wives is Missing, might also be in the mix.I was listening to a Bill Simmons pod the other day, and he mentioned how Den of Thieves was a mash up of Heat, Inside Man and The Usual Suspects! Yet he loved it, so it isn’t necessarily a bad thing to mix and match old plots. How many truly original ideas are there anyway? As in all art, execution is the key element.
One of My Wives is MissingThis is presumably one of the movies we remember Troy McClure from.
. . . Along with Gerta, the Oinking Car!
Well, “might” remember.
That and “Dial M for Murderousness”
You guys listen to Bill Simmons podcasts?
I found The Ringer by chance and listened to some podcasts there. As an Aussie, I have no idea who Simmons is, but found his talking with his friends about action movies they loved, reminded me of my dad and brother discussing their favourite movies.
The Rewatchables is a legitimately great podcast—Simmons brings on good guests to cover his blind spots. The late, great Binge Mode is also a worthwhile listen.Simmons has some notoriety for his work in sports (which is where he started out) which led to big feuds with sports leagues he criticized, particularly the NFL (American football) which in turn led to lots of drama with his former employer/the NFL’s broadcast partner, ESPN.
Den of Thieves was terrible though
TBH, I’ve never even watched Den of Thieves. I just thought it was interesting that someone could love it, despite being an obvious combination of three other movies he loved.
Pablo Schreiber is in it which immediately elevates anything to “watchable.”
front window
Yeah, the guy who wrote this sounds like an absolute psycho. Interestingly, he once utterly demolished one of Nathan Rabin’s books in the Washington Post, leading Rabin to have some thoughts on the subject when his karmic comeuppance came calling. https://www.nathanrabin.com/happy-place/2019/2/5/dan-mallory-and-me
Christ, getting a review like that is my absolute worst nightmare as an aspiring writer. I can’t imagine how it must’ve felt.
Then don’t worry about it because there will always be a trash-talker out there who will decimate your work/character for even the most illogical reasons.I thought the movie was good. Imo, this critic is more invested in what personally ‘bothers’ him than he is in what makes an entertaining thriller. He seems to have some problems with women-centered narratives in particular. Watch the movie if you’re of a mind to and reach your own conclusions. I’m betting that your own conclusions will be base on something more substantial than ‘the original author of this story is some kind of phony’.
Ah, I thought the list of crazy things the writer did/claimed sounded familiar, its because I read Rabin’s article talking about him.
A trashy Rear Window rip-off starring Amy Adams and Julianne Moore that’s written by fucking Tracy Letts (!) and it still isn’t any good? Damn.
It sounds like it’s Joe Wright’s fault.
It’s not *that* bad. I didn’t see either of the big twists coming. And the cast is aces across the board. It’s just doesn’t go beyond pulpy summer popcorn flick.
The book is decent as long as you aren’t expecting high art. It’s a trashy beach read for people who don’t like romance novels. I, personally, don’t care about the suspense in the movie because I read the book, so I know what will happen. I just want to see the book played out on screen.
Goddamn, Amy Adams & Julianne Moore, probably the 2 best working actors alive, and they finally share the screen in this?!
Honestly, if the film is at all faithful to the book’s third act, then it was always going to be a mess. When I learned that this book had been market researched* to the extent it had, I had to deeply wonder at the motivations of my fellow Americans. Because YIKES.If the last year has brought me anything good, it’s that crappy movies that I know will be bad but I still want to see are mostly all coming out on streaming services, so I don’t have to worry about spending my hard earned money on something I know will be ridiculous.*most books from repeat authors are market researched in some way – aka “write a vampire book because vampires are hot right now” – and good publishers and editors keep marketability in mind when giving their notes. But this book was written in a clearly “this is what the market wants” kind of way, and it shows by being utterly unremarkable.
More than… good grief. First sentence! It’s only online, but editing still matters.
“Editing”, how quaint.
Melanie Lynskey’s Hello I Must be Going was a good movie about an agoraphobic divorcee who gets involved in a somewhat inappropriate relationship with a younger man
I just want her to do comedy again. Maybe drama is where she’s happiest, maybe she just really wants that Oscar, but she’s so damn funny and charming and I’d like to see her in something that doesn’t make me horribly depressed.
I also prefer sunny, funny Amy Adams
Amy Adams in HER is the best Amy Adams.
Amy Adams was in HER?It was promoted as a Scarlett Johansson vehicle where I live.I enjoy and respect Ms. Johansson’s work, but not enough to watch the movie, she’s just “the voice” right?and the premise didn’t interest me at all.With Amy Adams, there I go now, wondering if it’s available on 1 of 3 streaming services I’ve subscribed to, tks!
Yes, ScarJo is just the voice. Adams’ role isn’t huge, but it’s a lived-in, contemporary, bit of melancholy performance that’s quite appealing.
You had me with Melanie L. …and that title cinched it.
The Bedroom Window, with Steve Guttenberg, from 87, was a decent Rear Window pastiche.
That Amy Adams has been in some real junk as of late. Ever since she appeared in that “Imagine” video at the height of lockdown, things haven’t been the same for her, I reckon.
I’m not at all surprised that this movie isn’t good. I read the book (don’t recommend it at all, but it took me a couple hours, it’s not that complex) and it is ridiculous. She’s deathly agoraphobic, until she’s not because something in the plot needs her to step outside. She’s crazy, or she’s being gaslighted, or maybe both, and then maybe she’s not either. Oh, and, um.. she’s really kinda dim considering all the stuff she does in the book.
We learn that she is separated from her husband, Ed (Anthony Mackie); hasn’t left the house in 10 months . . .Astonishing how “hasn’t left the house in many months” used to be storytelling shorthand for severe mental illness and is now just how many of us live.
This movie was a complete waste of Jennifer Jason Leigh.
I tried to watch this last night and…let’s just say C+ was a VERY generous grade. What a waste of a stellar cast.
With the talent attached to this, it’s surprising how bland and formulaic the film is. Just finished watching and it wasn’t bad but it wasn’t really that good either. Meh pretty much covers it – yet considering the cast and crews that has to go down as a disappointment. With Scott Rudin’s name attached as well as a lot of great people – someone needs to take the blame for this derivative disappointment
I found myself thinking during much of the movie that this whole thing could’ve been easily converted into a play, and it would’ve been much more enjoyable in that form. I don’t think it suddenly becomes high art or anything, but a lot of the contrivances that made me roll my eyes in the movie would make more sense on the stage where they could be explained away by the limitations of in-person performance. Adams and Oldman’s big performances would probably work better on stage as well.
I agree. I didn’t realize the whole history of it and thought it was such a sparse cast and mostly-one-location because it was shot in 2020 (a bit of the Servant approach), and I’d even wondered if it had been adapted from a play due to all of that. I think it would’ve been much better that way. And frankly they didn’t use the advantages that film has — a big reveal gives them an opportunity to flash back to put the pieces together in a really stunning way (“it all makes sense!”) that a play would generally have to do in dialogue, but they did neither here.
Can I get Amy Adams in my window? The woman in my window looks like this