schultz_jennifer Lying in Wait is a well developed characters study, you know these people. The movie is a plot driven thriller with a twist. The movie is not driven by sex or violence though both ocur in very limited moderation. The screen play is worth watching twice to get the nuances and subtle humor. Other than Rutgar Howard, most of the actor/actresses are not recognizable and maybe with the exception of "L" deliver fair to good performances. If you watch it twice, Rutger gets a little old as he continues to get older. The film quality is grainy and the sets are somewhat dark, which fits with the dark quality of the subject matter. I have seen better films, but certainly have seen worse. There is no doubt that Lying in Wait is a low budget film, but generally a well done low budget film. 

j_skillin While it is surely not for every taste, I highly recommend "Lying in Wait" to anyone who enjoys an off-beat thriller, with a talented cast and some surprising plot twists. Fans of Virginia Madsen will relish her fine performance here, another in her gallery of memorable femmes fatales ("Gotham," "Hot Spot," et al). Miss Madsen's seductive dance at the beach, with thundering surf as a backdrop, is one of those transcendent moments she often delivers -- even in her more mediocre films.But "Lying in Wait" is not a mediocre film. On the contrary, it is more art film than conventional thriller. The young neighbors (wonderfully portrayed by Vanessa Dorman and Thomas Newton) intrigue us with their innocent eccentricity. The story unfolds in dream-like fashion. It demands of us a "willing suspension of disbelief," but what psychological thriller does not?Finally, those who complain about murky photography are missing the point. "Lying in Wait" is best viewed as a waking dream and we must not expect to see everything clearly when we are dreaming. I believe the director and cinematographer were quite deliberate in taking this heavily stylized approach. (You can find this same kind of high-contrast photography and lighting in the film noir classics of the 1940s; the only difference being that most of those were shot in b&w.)

spectredoggie Where do I start??? Horrible direction. Bad acting. Bad writing. Oh yeah, did I mention the directing was awful?This could have been a decent thriller had it a tiny smidgen of subtlety and taste in how it was delivered. As it stands, it's just another waste of an hour and a half.Avoid this like the plague!!!

hartert Some nice little surprises here! Very well acted and an interesting story. You definately need to view this film more than once to appreciate it fully. The casting was great and the dialogue quite believable. This is a dark and yet delightful movie,,,Well done!