Rivals (2000 TV Movie) User Reviews

This movie is based on a true story.

[Stiebernator007 · 7/10 · 1 March 2006]

I am from Lancaster County. I live less than ten miles from where this story took place. I thought it was well done. They got the facts right, facts that I remember reading in the newspaper at the time. I work with a woman who went to school with both Laurie Show and Lisa Michelle Lambert. This town still has strong emotions about this story. I hope that telling this horrific story will educate people about how real and dangerous stalking can become. I hope that people will realize that bad things can happen anywhere even is a small tight knit community like Lancaster. I hope that this story will allow people to see how dangerous teenage feuds can become.

Based on one of the first stalking cases in the US

[iaeinekind · 7/10 · 17 November 2005]

I think what makes this movie unique is that it is historical fiction. It actually tries to tell the story of Laurie Show, one of the first victims of a stalker in Pennsylvannia, and one of the reasons why laws such as The Violence Against Women Act were made against stalkers in the early 90s.

I think the director made less of an attempt to tell a good story and more of an attempt to tell THE story. It's interesting in and of itself, that Laurie was killed by another teenage girl, since most violence against women in the United States is committed by current or former boyfriends/husbands.

I am glad that the USA Network makes movies like these about real people.

Movie of the week quality

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 1 March 2014]

Based on a true story, popular and volatile Michelle Lambert (Marnette Patterson) befriends shy Laurie Show (Jennifer Finnigan). One night, Michelle's boyfriend Butch Yunkin (Rel Hunt) rapes Laurie. Michelle is pregnant by Butch and starts harassing Laurie.

Marnette is good as a jealous psychopath. Jennifer Finnigan is good at playing fragile girls, but she's too mature for the part. She needs to be younger and weaker. She really needs to play up the victim role.

The other problem is the quality of the production. This is strictly movie of the week quality. The directions and the style have nothing behind it. The best thing in the movie are the two harrowing performances, but it just couldn't elevate the movie from its melodramatic roots.

Wow!

[Jake-46 · 2 January 2003]

This is a kind of movie I've seen several times before. The movie starts with one of the final scenes, and you are about 95% sure what will eventually happen to Laurie. But I really enjoyed it. Mostly because of Marne Patterson as Michelle. She was *awful*. She was so bad. One of the worst female characters I have ever seen on TV. And she did it extremely well. At least *I* was convinced she was the psycho she turned out to be.

Read that someone said that *too much* was changed from the original story. Too bad. Still worth watching though, indeed...

It was good, but they shouldn't have done it

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 7/10 · 12 February 2004]

Now, there are thousands of murders a year. And very violent ones. And this was a brutal murder, but my question is. Why would the mother of Laurie Show let them do a movie about her daughter's death? And of course I'm sure that they embellished a bit with the story. But it seemed pointless to me.

The movie is good. The actors did a good job. It's just the concept of the story that bugs me.

7/10

Seen this movie one too many times.

[Hermit C-2 · 4/10 · 18 December 2000]

The problem with this TV-movie, to paraphrase Dr. Johnson, is not that it is done so badly, but that it is done at all. Years ago a movie about the type of crime depicted here might have been unique and intriguing. Sadly for both society at large and the TV viewing public, it's all too commonplace now. There have been at least a dozen movies on this same subject. This film may be worse than some and better than others, but it does nothing to distinguish itself from the pack. After seeing so many similar flicks, some stock characters emerge. Of these, the terrorized victim and her mother aren't drawn too badly, but the closet psycho-homecoming queen is not as compelling as that character should be, in this viewer's opinion. And her oafish boyfriend is so shallow that he's a major irritation every time he's onscreen.

There are no laughable performances here, and the direction is at least competent, if not distinguished. Even Jennifer Salt's script is not a bad one, but she fails to convince us why we should want to watch these unpleasant characters. If you think you've seen one too many stalker movies, this certainly isn't the one that's going to change your mind.

Must protect Jennifer!

[StevenPlaymountain · 10/10 · 4 June 2005]

Mostly whenever there's a TV-movie on television, I turn it off, or switch the channel. I didn't with this one. I guess it was Jennifer Finnigans strangely attractive pale sweetness that kept me watching this flic. This movie was a bit over the top at times, but still, it moved me a great deal. I couldn't help myself, all the time I was yelling in my thoughts:'for crying out loud, somebody help this girl!' But no one helps her, and constantly having to watch this injustice is excruciating. I don't know much about real high school life in the USA, but the struggle for fitting in certainly is universal. Be hip or be square. Be popular or die, would be the tag line in this movie. The heroine is just so sweet and innocent and you don't want anything to happen to her, and you think nothing will, just because she is ... sweet and innocent. Maybe the flash forwards at the beginning were just nightmares of Lauries mother, or one of her friends? But no sirree bob, she dies. Just like that. Lauries mother says something which sums it up: 'There are no laws to control sick people'. Constantly you're scared of this Michelle character, and at the end you're just deeply saddened and angered by her deeds (the beautiful 'amazing grace' which plays in the background can't possibly heal the wounds). There's no room for positive emotions or a fairy tale-ending in this movie, and strange enough, exactly this was what I liked and didn't like about it. Hard to believe this movie is based on facts. What a world... The last time I felt so shocked about the injustice done to an innocent person was while watching 'dancer in the dark' with Bjork. Be warned: watching this movie will make you depressed. And probably, when you go to sleep, and close your eyes, you'll see Jennifer Finnigan, and you'll think: Why? Why? Luckily Jennifer is alive and well, which can't be said of the real Laurie, poor thing.

Excellent

[kelaz_fisha · 10/10 · 12 December 2005]

I thought this movie was excellent. It portrays the real side to life for a teenager, and is very relevant to todays society.

Although there are frequent movies on this same subject, i believe this shows outstanding characters and fights to make this movie into a reality for the viewer.

The end of this story shocked me, although i knew it was going to happen, it was a huge awakening. I only hope that nothing like this happens in my life or to people surrounding me.

I give the movie 10 out of 10 for one main reason. It seemed real. There was none of that bull that other movies bung on about it was straightforward and realistic. It was interesting all the way through and it taught me a lot about the kind of people i should be associating with.

When are they going to release this one on tape?

[badsharkmovie · 19 June 2002]

*****SPOILERS AHOY!*****

Great TV movie. Very affective; I was depressed for days afterwards. This movie gave viewers a great reality check, letting everyone know that, no matter how much you want it, the hero/heroine CAN die in the end, even if they didn't deserve it. And knowing that this is a true story, not just some fictionalization with made-up characters, makes it even more depressing. Jennifer Finnagen is very good as the doomed Laurie, Marne Patterson plays an awesome psycho, and the rest of the supporting cast was also very good.

What really gets me, however, is how they can release the "Cabin by the Lake" series on DVD and VHS, the first being a movie i couldn't even make it all the way through, but not this movie! Please, I'm begging you USA Network, release this on video, even if it is just a crappy VHS in EP mode! PLEASE!

Very disturbing - poor Laurie!

[catherinekeohane · 10/10 · 4 April 2007]

This does contain spoilers: I've just finished watching this film on Sky and am greatly disturbed by it all. I don't think I've ever seen a female character portraying such evil tendencies before! Michelle is the ultimate evil murderess, totally deranged and obsessive. Laurie is sweet and easily manipulated, badly let down by many people, the police including. It's disturbing to think that someone like Michelle could have such a strong hold upon people that they'd be afraid to come forward and prevent this terrible crime happening.

I've read various comments regarding the "true story" of Laurie's murder here, some claim that the facts are wrong. Well we all know that certain things are changed in order for the film to be shown. Some names changed, or incidents for instance.

So is the real story of Laurie even more disturbing I wonder, or do people have sympathy for Michelle who is certainly sick in the head.

Michelle apparently gave permission for Laurie to go off with her boyfriend, or rather "ex" boyfriend and then Laurie, inexperienced, gets herself raped by Michelle's ex. Michelle catches them and declares he did the same thing to her. What did she mean by this? That they made love in the barn or that he raped her as well? Whatever, she takes him back and so begins the terror for Laurie.

I wondered whether if the rape had been reported things wouldn't have gotten so far.

And it's a shame that there's not people brave enough to stand up against people like Michelle.

I kept hoping that Laurie wouldn't get killed, but of course she did.

I was a trifle disappointed not to learn what sentences were passed to the others involved in this terrible crime.

Very disturbing. Excellent acting all round.

The Stalking of Laurie Show

[bische_ · 10/10 · 7 June 2003]

This true story is a modern, moving masterpiece. We see the life of Laurie Show (the delightful Jennifer Finnigan) get turned into a one way street to hell when she mixes with the 'popular crowd' only to find them to be deluded and physcotic.

The acting and writing is superb and the film maintains a believable, camp appeal,0 although sometimes it borders a non-realistic horror film.

Bizarre!!!

[menaka · 11 January 2002]

Classing this movie is difficult,it's bizarre,frightening and tragic.The fact that it was based on a true story got me watching and all the way till the end I was thinking about how unbelievably terrible this tragedy must have been,especially for the real Hazel Show.But my mind wasn't on much else,the scenes were scrappily put together,the script lacking and Finnigan....well let's just say she could have played the part better.It wasn't entirely bad though,Lambert(Patterson) was truly loathing and psychotic,and there were other notable performances namely that of Humes,Hunt and Vannicola.It was one of those movies that you HAVE to watch till the end,but once you've watched it you think it could have been done better.

Pretty Scary...

[yellow866 · 5 April 2002]

This movie was on the TV last night. At first I only wanted to watch because Dawson's mom (Dawson's Creek) plays Laurie's mom, but it proved to be a decent show. All through the movie, I kept thinking: Man, this really happened? No way. It says "True Story" ... Nahh! Couldn't be. Oh, it is then? It's disgusting! If we have to set aside the suspected criminal's human rights to further investigate the problem, let's do it. What happened to Laurie really could have been avoided, the laws just aren't tough enough. It's far worse finding out the hard way that you've had the criminal sitting in the police station before her deed was done and the police couldn't do a thing about it because all you have for evidence is your word over hers. Are there really such horrible people in this World?

good movie

[winterka · 29 October 2002]

this is a really good movie if you think of it as a fictional story and enjoy made for television movies. although only fragments of the story actually relate to the true case which i found kind of ridiculous. but it's good if your just looking for a interesting story line.

It is not all factual

[sleekchica05 · 26 October 2001]

I am from Lancaster County, PA. I live in the same school district that some of the actual people attended at one time. I knew Laurie Show and Tabitha Buck and Lawrence Yunkin, and Lisa Michelle Lambert. I am sory but this movie upset me greatly. Half of the details are incorrect and make the other veiwers of this movie believe inaccurate details. As I watched I would point out to my sister what was accurate and inaccurate. I have been following the story all 10 years and I was very upset about the lies in the movie.

Why mix good in with bad?

[llihilloh · 28 December 2000]

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** USA frequently comes up with good movies. I've always thought that TV movies are far better than the motion pictures. This is not one of the best TV movies I have seen, but it still holds my attention mainly because it is so bizarre.

"The Stalking of Laurie Show" isn't that strange, but it's a little complex. One of the problems that this film has is that too many main and minor characters are introduced to the audience. We have Hazel, Butch, Laurie, Michelle, Samantha, Tabby, and a lot of others. Keep in mind that while the story focuses on Laurie, all of these characters are still considered to be very important. At times the movie is a bit confusing. (Specifically when Michelle claims that she has lost the baby.)

The second problem that I have with this film is that they mix good in with bad. GOOD: the plot, Marne Patterson ---------- BAD: the writing, Jennifer Finnigan ---------- This film starts out good with an interesting idea and plot to go off of. But after the first hour or so, it becomes ruined with awful writing. The characters can't be categorised as good or bad because there are both. Patterson gives an excellent performance as Michelle, the not-all-there blond that seeks out to get revenge. Then you have Finnigan who I'm sorry, couldn't act her way out of a paper bag. She can't play the part of Laurie that is supposed to be holding on for dear life. Literally. If this part would have been re-casted, the film might have held up a lot better. The other main characters Rel Hunt and Mary-Margaret Humes do a good job. Hunt who is relatively a newcomer to the business, does alright playing the part of Butch, but doesn't have that something in order for his role to stand out. Humes is great as Laurie's mother, Hazel. Too much mixing of actors' range for me.

The writing is good, but only on Michelle's part. Her evilness and throat-cutting threats really makes me believe that she is a b**** that the part calls for. The rest is garbage.

*~spoiler only if you didn't see the ending*~

The only thing that I like besides Patterson's performance is the ending. The sentimental piece where Amazing Grace starts to play in the background has a touching moment about it. Sad but true. The sentencing and trial of Michelle is based on a true story, but I couldn't help but saying 'good' when she was convicted.

If you're in the mood for a movie with too many twists but still holds your attention because you keep waiting for the ending, than this is definitely for you. FINAL WORDS: Sally, stick to your talk show.

Typical Aggravating TV Movie

[brianvan · 1 July 2001]

Made-for-TV movies are all a sort of junk food in the movie genre, but you can easily classify them into two types... ones that resolve themselves satisfactorily, and ones that are aggravating to watch. This is the second type.

*SPOILERS AHEAD*

First, let me be positive and say that the acting wasn't entirely ridiculous... and Marne Patterson makes a good villain. I can't fault the plot entirely, because the movie was based on a true story... yet the movie still manages to suck based on how the plot was rearranged and how the true story was structured.

Good thriller-stalker movies play out like "Fear" or "Fatal Attraction". Sure, the main characters go through pain, but the villain always gets what is coming to them. Of those kind of movies, the annoyance factor depends on how believable and/or intelligent the protagonist(s) is(are).

However, this is more of a "True story about a terrible tragedy + thriller" kind of movie. TV movies almost exclusively fill out this subgenre of thrillers. There's a reason that major motion pictures are not about innocent people that get murdered by people who eventually get caught and sent to jail. Because people would be disgusted leaving the theater. At least on cable TV, there's always gonna be people too lazy to change the channel once the movie is going.

You can make a movie about murderers who kill bad people, or about murderers who kill innocent people but then get killed themselves by a hero, or perhaps you can go the "Natural Born Killers" route and make a movie about murderers who get away in the end. Likewise, you can make a movie about a good guy who dies in the end, like "Braveheart" or "American Beauty", but the resolution has to be happy somehow... both of those movies managed to do that through plot devices (William Wallace died heroically and the armies charged in his honor at the end; Lester Burnham softened the audience at the beginning of the movie with the news of his impending death and then managed to make us feel happy for him at the end of the movie).

You CANNOT, though, make the good guys walk right into the hands of the villains for a whole movie, have the villains get their way eventually at the expense of the good guys, and then simply have the villains go to jail for the crime. It's an empty way to end a movie, and it only serves to get people angry. But TV movies do this repeatedly, and this is one of those movies that does that.

Of course, if you know where the plot goes, and you can't avoid that ending, then the people behind the movie (writers, directors, producers, editors) should be held accountable if the movie has a bad ending. There are ways to deal with bad endings that can still leave a good taste in the audience's mouths. However, this movie simply makes all the good guys miserable and defeated, with the villain only getting the "criminal justice" type of retribution. Simply imagine "Fatal Attraction" ended with Glenn Close killing Michael Douglas, and then the movie ends with her trial, a "guilty" sentence, and a shot of her behind bars being unapologetic . Yea, that's what happens here.

At least the "Amazing Grace" montage is done well, but that was around the point in the movie where I was thinking "This stupid movie now has no chance to redeem itself." Again, it's based on a true story, but it's a true story told badly.

Just about as bad as the main resolution of the plot for the major characters is the resolution for the supporting cast. Basically, you have a bunch of good people standing around feeling guilty and empty because of their tragic loss. Bleh.

And to further the insult to the audience, the climax is carried out OFF camera... and then shown to us later as a collection of dispersed gory scenes! What a horrible thing to do to the audience! I mean, it's supposed to really deliver the point of the movie for it's dumb resolution, but that doesn't make the resolution better, and it only makes the tragedy worse.

Of course, if you're like me at all, you'll get sucked into the movie when it's just beginning, you'll follow it along, then you'll get increasingly angry at the villain, and finally you'll watch in disgust as the movie carries out its plan to show you a tragic story where everyone loses, and loses big. There's a few good things interspersed, and the movie isn't ALL bad for a TV movie, but be prepared for the fact that this is a movie with no heroes, only victims and a villain. Stories like these should be left to "Dateline NBC".