Mistrust (2018) User Reviews

Different with interesting dialog

[phd_travel · 7/10 · 7 September 2018]

A middle aged woman likes being mistress to married men but wants nothing more than her independence. Of course the best friend and her is there and the crux of the movie is will they find love with each other. Oddly the main character has a point wanting to be independent. Some may find what she is doing distasteful but somehow when she rationalizes it things make sense. Jane Seymour is one of the youngest looking actresses of her generation. She is so slim. And her face doesn't look botoxed or worse like many actresses her age. It's nice to hear her speaking in her native English accent.

Not a typical middle aged rom com but worth watching.

Just not worth the time

[franklindf · 3/10 · 9 October 2019]

The movie is reasonably well made but it falls well short of being a good movie. It's basically a relationship drama about an aging woman who practices polyamory meaning she pursues multiple sexual relationships concurrently and ensuring each relationship stays superficial enough to avoid strings being attached. It sounds interesting enough in theory but the reality disappoints because, mainly the characters are not compelling enough to make the viewer really care. Date one man or date 10, sorry I just can't be bothered to concern myself. It might be different if the female lead was someone I might like to date. But she's just an older lady without much really going for her. She's not unattractive per se, but I just don't see any sizzle and I think most men would agree. I can't say much for the other characters either. If you just wanted something on to waste some time, this could work. But if you're expecting more, just pass on this.

Complete waste of time.

[natvernenat · 14 October 2019]

Fortunately, I didn't pay a dime to watch this piece of rubbish. However, I pity my friend who did.. I'll explain the reasons why: 1. Acting: Way below par even from those actors and actresses I consider to have some sort of talent (Seymour/Shockley). Shockley is still "trapped" in his DQMW "Hank Lawson" role and he needs to snap out of it; 2. Plot: Nothing to see here; 3. Dialogue: Nonsensical and in the best of cases, annoyingly whiny and infested with self-pity; All in all, this film was so overbearing with pretentious and irreverently bland acting, incongruous plot and no meaningful dialogue nor interpersonal dynamics between the main characters involved. What a self-indulgent and ridiculous pile of rubbish. To reiterate, I'm glad I didn't pay a dime to watch this. However, I did waste circa 2 hours of my life for it..

Truly surprised...

[graceoverpressuretheoneANDonly · 8/10 · 31 October 2021]

I thought this was a very circumspective love story with a most reasonable if not believable plot. I was caught off guard by William Shockley being one of Veronica's love interest's and couldn't place him at first then BINGO, "Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman" and the crazy saloon keeper, Hank. -So to see him in this dynamic opposite with Jane Seymour as a love interest was rather provocative. While the movie was a bit slow? I totally understand the relationships including the well played gay couple who added great interest to Veronica's life if not that of Brandon. Being in "the vicinity" of Jane Seymour's peer group? I totally and completely found many of her traits identifiable and realistic. Though I felt Brandon was too much a "cut above" the average man to be as enlightened as he was. I'm actually very impressed with many of the made for TV movies and others that JS has played in - in the past decade. She was also good in her Netflix role of the "Kominsky Method" of late. I hope she continues on as she is as a beautiful actress with a real style and class that few continue to possess in her/my age group. Very enjoyable movie; not "earth shaking" but most definitely, thought provoking.

No substance; no interest

[fam-32854 · 2/10 · 6 July 2018]

A sad story about friends in love, but who can't admit it. The story had huge holes and lacked the details to flush out interest in this story. The acting wasn't too bad, but the script was so weak, I couldn't force myself to stay engaged.

It didn't hang together for me. It might for you, but don't expect too much.

[iantrader · 3/10 · 10 June 2018]

Gosh! Who on earth scores this so highly??

It's an interesting concept - a serial mistress wanting no commitments - but it's cliched, a bit predictable and the plot develops through 'logical argument' rather than character drives.

Ok, one at a time...

Cliched - ok, we'll give it the Rom cliche - girl meets boy, girl loses boy - girl may or may not get boy back (so as to avoid any spoilers) - but she works in a bookshop - or ows it or part owns it, it's not clear - and one of her best friends also works there (or owns it) and is gay. Ring any bells? All the meetings she has are in swanky restaurants or hotels. That defines a type of Chic Lit fiction which perhaps this is.

A bit predictable. After the initial intro you know where it's heading. As is often the case with RomComs (altho this is a RomDrama) but there were plenty of opportunities to step off the path a bit.

Plot development. Ok, this is the worst thing and it appears in many, many American series. It's where the author wants a relationship to change and they do it by constructing a 'logical' (or sometimes not so logical) argument between the characters. Probably not the first example, but I became increasingly aware of the technique in The Arrow series and then it seemed to pop up everywhere. There's a lot of talking in the movie, and a lot of these arguments.

Other than that... :-)

Well, I love Jane Seymour but she's no spring chicken. In fact she's 66 and she's playing a 40-something. I hope to god she's not supposed to be a 30-something. Hey, maybe she's a 50-something. That would make more sense but I feel the character is def in her 40s. Having said that she looks terrific and very foxy!

Parker Stevenson is a year younger but he looks his age so we have a 40-something with a 60-something. Nothing wrong with that particularly but he's also dating a definitie 30-ish woman. Like it or not, such age differences do matter and do need to be discussed in a relationship but it's not mentioned here when so many other things are.

Anyway, the movie didn't quite hang together for me. Nor for most of the reviewers, so who's giving it these high score?

It might work for you, but don't expect too much.

Jane Seymour looked like she was going to eat Parker Stevenson

[juneebuggy · 4/10 · 18 October 2019]

Jane Seymour was the reason I initially watched and then stuck through this. She plays a woman who relishes her life as a mistress, only having relationships with married men, she then finds her feelings tested by an old friend but can't admit it.

Not a great movie, on a made for T.V/ Hallmarkish sort of style & budget, it was nice to see a woman Jane's age, with...gasp... wrinkles in a romance, she's still beautiful. There are some kinda gross love scenes, even disregarding the age factor that had way too much open mouthed kissing, Jane looked like she was going to eat Parker Stevenson at one point, I had too look away.

Serial mistress

[jaimegonzales210 · 3/10 · 1 June 2018]

It seems like the main character spends half her dialogue or more explaining why she chooses to only be in relationships with men who are married.

Nowhere in the movie are there discussions regarding infidelity or the betrayal of any of the men's spouses. Needless to say this is not a movie to watch with your wife. A morality tale this is not.

The thing that seems to be missing is rationale. Something to explain why anyone should care about a woman who deliberately endeavors to assist men in cheating on their wives. Where is the dignity in this kind of behavior?

The acting is okay. I have always liked Jane Seymour since her Bond-girl days. Maybe I expected this to be something more, something meaningful and dignified. Parker Stevenson is okay, but since the Hardy Boys (I read all of the books and seen probably every episode) I have never seen him in anything I cared for much at all. Just not very believable as an actor.

Basically this is a movie about a serial mistress and the men she pretends she is in a relationship with while they all ignore the betrayal in which they are engaging. Near the end is the obligatory high-school music soundtrack montage where her and her best-friend realize they love each other. Also her co-worker is a married gay comedian who tells a joke about blackmailing jocks in high school. Then her best-friend admits he loves her. She says the same thing back to him. HINT: For his entire adult life she has been a serial mistress, including with him.

He and she both should understand that neither one of them understand concepts like fidelity or monogamy. But they end up together anyway.

Hideous!

[steffcor · 1/10 · 27 September 2018]

This movie is so horribly done I could not even finish it! Jane Seymour acting as a confident, sexy mistress is a joke. Why would you want to be some man's side piece without getting any benefits? And the music was totally inappropriate! Better suited for a teen flick. This movie was horrible! I've always thought that Jane Seymour was a bit of a narcissist but this takes the cake!

A "free" Hooker!

[Australian1 · 3/10 · 4 June 2018]

She doesn't trust anyone, nit even herself! Can't commit to one man! Oddly, Jane Seymour has been married four times, so this is a part she can "act" pretty well. I like/d the actress, ever since I saw her as a 22 year old in James Bond's "Live and Let Die"... This movie may appeal to some, I suffered it through half a dozen "love" scenes with various men and it's not my cup of tea as I believe in monogamy, to have one partner for better or worse, something no one follows or believes in these days. I honestly can't recommend this film, unless someone is in the middle of an imminent break up and want to use it for reference on what not to do or say. Maybe I am biased because I was in a relationship for a few years and it ended because she felt she didn't know what she wanted, but even tho I gave her all she wanted, it was not enough ...

The worst frigging movie I have ever seen!

[Hclambake · 24 January 2019]

In a very long, long while. Terrible - walk away, walk away.

Quite possibly the worst film I've watched in a long while

[haggismcbird · 1/10 · 22 December 2023]

This is just awful, it's so beneath you Jane Seymour. I've always loved your work but this was just dire. I think for me it just dragged on. The plot was just appalling, It wasn't about female empowerment as much as a woman who quite clearly didn't mind being used. There's nothing empowering in that. The ending is just bizarre, a relationship built on lies. Good luck with that one deary. Plus point, good on you for not hiding your age you are still a lovely looking woman and in a business where youth and looks seem to be important that's impressive. As far as I'm concerned it's an hour and a half I won't get back. Also how has it got such a positive rating on here. No accounting for tase I suppose.