User reviews

Very convoluted and not terribly interesting. Actors did the best they could with the material provided. The overly complicated script and confusing direction let them down.

🔪 (1 Knife) 🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷 (5 glasses of wine required.)

This movie is a great example of what unoriginal mediocrity looks like. I'm convinced it was written by a 12 year old creative writing student who grew up with parents that only ever watched bad soap operas.

The acting is so beyond horrific even for a TV movie. So many things shoved into this movie beyond the thriller theme, but nothing gets really deeply explored or resolved so it's just a bunch of teaser issues thrown in. Indescribably bad acting. Can't even take the acting at face value given the TV movie status. Do not watch this movie.

Interesting enough storyline, with a couple of subplots to fill it out. Worth watching on a snowy afternoon.

Seriously, let this one go. Predictable plot, poor acting, stilted dialog.

DEADLY SECOND CHANCES/LOVE YOU TO DEATH (TV movie 2015) 1.5 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 5 min (lots to complain about)

BASIC PLOT: Yasmine Winters (Bree Williamson) grew up hard. She's now an ADA, with a daughter, Paige (Emilija Baranac), but when she was a little girl, she was horrifically abused by her father, Jack (Wesley Salter). She also watched him violently abuse her mother, and her sister, Laura (Jill Morrison). Jack's horrific brutality ends up killing the girls' mother (indirectly). But instead of shaping up, and caring for his daughters', he abandons them, leaving a teenaged Laura to care for her young sister, Yasmine.

A case, similar to her mother's tragic end, was recently assigned to Yasmine. It's caused her to have panic attacks, and PTSD symptoms, including passing out in the courtroom. Joan, her boss, insists she take a stress leave, and go see her sister, Laura.

But the stress, and the case follow her, and there are some horrors that just won't stay in the past. Can Yasmine realize which dangers are real, in time to save her family?

WHAT WORKS: *NOTHING! NOTHING WORKS! I will say Bree Williamson does an ok acting job with the hackneyed script she's given. It's also decently shot, and directed, for a low budget, made-for-tv movie.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *WHY IS JOAN NOT ON THE CREDITS? Joan is Yasmine 's boss, who has several speaking scenes throughout the movie, yet she's not on the opening credits, and she's not listed on IMDb either, why? Neither is Governor Locke, Security Guard Stone and a few others. I find it offensive to leave out the ancillary characters.

*DA WINTERS NEVER WOULD HAVE BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE LOCKE CASE Yasmine would never be assigned to a case that mimics her mother's death. It's likely the defense would get ahold of this information, and use it against her in court. Her superiors would give the case to someone else.

*THE JUDGE SAYS BECAUSE THERE'S A SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT, IT MUST BE TRUE That's nonsense, but she would declare a mistrial while an investigation took place into the alleged prosecutorial misconduct.

*THE TV NEWS REPORT MAKES IT SOUND LIKE PEOPLE BELIEVE THE RICH & POWERFUL GOVERNOR, NOT THE SMALL DA People would be more apt to believe a powerful governor bribed the jury to get a mistrial for his son, than a ADA with a grudge, bribed the jury to get a conviction. Again, this is a reason why ADA Winters would not have been assigned this case to begin with (she has motive, because the case mimics her mother's death)

*THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO INVESTIGATE ADA WINTERS' MISCONDUCT ADA Winters was prosecuting Gov. Barry Locke's son, Timothy, and the governor was also a witness in the case. These facts would preclude him from taking any official actions through the governor's office, relating to this case. He would not be allowed near the investigation, and he would not be given confidential prosecution case files.

*WHY HAVEN'T LAURA & YASMINE SEEN EACH OTHER IN YEARS? And why does Joan, Yasmine's boss, get to tell her where to go on holiday (she tells her to go see her sister, who now lives in the house where their mother died)? Why insist Yasmine go to her childhood home, a place laden with terrible memories of the very things she's trying to forget? Why not go to the Bahamas instead? And why does your boss get to tell you where to go on vacation?!?

*NO ONE WHO HAS A SISTER CALLS HER "SIS" It's a clunky, overused way to show the audience the sororal relationship. It's stupid, it sounds wrong to the audience, and should be abandoned as a writing technique. As a writer, if you do your job properly, we'll know who these women are to each other.

*IF YASMINE IS THIS TRAUMATIZED, SHE PROBABLY NEEDS INTENSIVE PSYCHIATRIC CARE Yasmine is passing out in court (from a panic attack), being forced to take a stress leave by her boss, and having PTSD like flashbacks, both in court, and in her childhood home. As a clinician, I would recommend therapy at least twice a week, and maybe even inpatient treatment for her. I certainly wouldn't recommend she return to the place of the initial trauma (without professional help), and work on a case that's a constant reminder of the abuse she suffered, and witnessed, as a child.

*ON AVERAGE, 3 WOMEN ARE MURDERED EVERY DAY IN THE UNITED STATES BY A CURRENT OR FORMER PARTNER That's a disgusting statistic, and what's worse, it usually happens when the male partner tries to lure the female back (from a safe environment), with promises of change. I was infuriated when this aired on Lifetime Television, a channel for women, promoting messages that could put women in danger. While I agree with the premise of healing, I don't agree with statements indicating forgiveness and reconciliation are the only ways to release anger. In fact, those tropes could harbor real danger to women who are facing abuse from a partner. My advice to current, or former abuse survivors, the only safe thing for you to do is to NEVER see your abuser again. Get some help, heal your wounds, find a safe place, grow strong, but NEVER see him again!

WHY DID TWO MALE WRITERS FEEL THE NEED TO CREATE A PEN NAME TO HIDE THEIR IDENTITIES?

The script writers Jason Bourque & Keith Shaw, created a ghost name as the writer, someone named Lindsay James, but there was no such person on IMDb, until I created the credit, which verifies, it is a pen name. Why did Jason Bourque & Keith Shaw feel the need to hide their identities? Is it because this movie is riddled with sexist tropes, that could be harmful to women? Cathy McKernan wrote the original treatment, but I doubt this is the vision she had in mind for her story idea. It's hard to believe any woman could be involved with a script this dangerous to women.

*THE RIGHT MAN CAN FIX EVERYTHING! MORE TERRIBLE MESSAGING TO ABUSED WOMEN!

A partner will not fix anything, until you work through your own trauma, and help heal yourself. Paige meets Peter (Mike Dopud), the good guy next door, and her problems melt away. What a bunch of nonsense! Unless you get help for your emotional wounds, your relationships will fail (as I'm assuming Yasmine's relationship with Paige's father did, or he would still be in the picture). Who wrote this tripe?

*PAIGE'S FATHER IS STALKING HER, EVEN THOUGH SHE HAS A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST HIM and that's supposed to be ok, because Paige needs forgiveness in her life? The man was severely abusive to both daughters, and their mother. He abandoned them when their mother died, but they're supposed to forgive and forget? You don't need to forgive to let go of anger, and you certainly should KEEP TOXIC PEOPLE OUT OF YOUR LIFE, especially ones who try to bully or guilt you into forgiveness, as Jack does to Paige, Laura & Yasmine.

*THE TERRIBLE MESSAGES JUST KEEP ON COMING Yasmine agrees to take over as public defender (wait, isn't she an ADA?) for Carla (Dani Alvarado) a client of Laura's, who's also an abuse victim.

When Yasmine chides Carla, her new client, about her current behavior, her drug use, hanging out with reprobates, and being charged with a felony, Laura comes rigorously to Carla's defense. Laura believes all these behaviors are excusable, because Carla is trying to numb the pain of the domestic violence she suffered. When Yasmine reminds her that child protective services will never allow Carla to have her child back, given her current behavior, Laura says they should excuse it because of her abusive background. WHAT?! Laura is saying it's ok to be a drug addicted, partying mother, to a small child, just because you were an abuse victim? Are you kidding me? What about Carla's daughter?! Doesn't she have the right to a safe and healthy environment? Everything Yasmine said to Carla was correct. Get sober, drop your party friends, grow up, and be a good mother. Excellent advice.

*LAURA TAKES HER NIECE, PAIGE, TO MEET JACK, THE ABUSIVE FATHER, BEHIND YASMINE'S BACK I cannot believe this movie. I cannot believe Lifetime Television bought it. Laura takes Paige to meet her grandfather, WITHOUT telling her first, and knowing Yasmine, Paige's mother, is against it. Laura is forcing Paige to go against her mother, and forcing her to lie to her mother, by springing this meeting on her. Laura knows Yasmine has a restraining order against Jack, so she's breaking the law by bringing him to the house where Yasmine is staying.

When Paige wants nothing to do with Jack, and storms off, he becomes angry at her, and at Yasmine, showing he hasn't changed, and is still toxic. Laura's reaction to his anger is very dysfunctional, and enabling to Jack, showing she is not ready to have a relationship with him either. Jack blames everything on his drinking problem (a common excuse from abusers), and everyone says Yasmine needs Jack in her life to heal. OMG, COULD YOU BE ANY MORE WRONG!? Even if Jack has changed, and even if he's ready, YASMINE IS NOT! She clearly needs help to address her issues, BEFORE she'd be ready to have any kind of relationship with her father. Guilting or forcing her into a relationship with him, would do more harm than good. Does no one care what's best for Yasmine, the person with the issues Jack caused?

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: I'm angry at Lifetime Television, for buying a script HARMFUL TO WOMEN. This is WHAT NOT TO DO when facing abusive relationships. It is one terrible message after another.

On a separate note about the script, this would still be terrible without all the bad messaging to women. This is what I call a "Barbie script". It is reminiscent of storylines my nine year old self, and my nine year old friend's, would come up with when we would play Barbies. In other words, it's fatuous to the point of being laughable. It's legal storylines are so puerile, they become trifling and ridiculous, almost insulting to an adult audience.