Mesmerized

1986 "An arranged marriage. A deranged murder."
Mesmerized
4.7| 1h37m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 31 December 1986 Released
Producted By: Manchester Productions
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

An orphan weds an older man in circa-1900 New Zealand, then finds out he's a miser who spies on her.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Manchester Productions

Trailers & Images

Reviews

George Escalera My Letter to George, a.k.a., Mesmerized, has all the right parts for a very good movie. As it is, it only confounded this viewer.The performers are well cast and all very good in their roles. The music, the sets and costuming along with the stars all seem committed to relating a very interesting tale based on actual events. In my opinion, it is the ham-fisted editing that sinks the movie. It is possible that the script was not working and a last ditch effort to save the movie in the editing room leaves us with the convoluted release.We find Oliver Thompson (John Lithgow), to be a man comfortable only in the universe he created for himself and seems to have invited his child-bride, Jodie Foster's Victoria, into that plan only to emulate his domineering father with the child she was to bear. In this version, Oliver's younger brother George Thompson (Dan Shor) comes off as a lesser character. With more time on screen for development we might we might be able to see what attracts Victoria to him other than merely being a seemingly better option to her circumstance.There have been some negative comments about the grainy cinematography however I should think that was a deliberate decision on the part of the filmmaker to keep the setting from looking romantic which would have worked against the story. The Jodie Foster character was living in a world that was hardly kind to women. A pretty countryside, nice clothes and home did not make it a wonderful life for Victoria.Worth a look and should be of interest to students of film.
Peter Grunbaum I thought this was a fairly interesting movie about mesmerism and the so-called fourth dimension. It is also about a lot of other things but it does deliver if you want to experience something about the wonders of the mind and the nature of mesmerism. In 1880 mesmerism would have been a new science and I do not know if much has happened since in this area. The story moves very slowly but it all becomes clear in the end. Therefore I think this is a good movie with a very nice plot. Jodie Foster is very pretty as the lead character and it is interesting to see the countryside in New Zealand. I can understand if some people might find this movie boring but I did not since it all becomes clear in the end why the story was told in the way it is in the movie.
longislandlloyd I bought this film at a 99 Cents store and basically got my money's worth. But I was very disappointed. Where was all the cruelty and bizarre sexual behavior? It really left a lot to your imagination, and a lot to be desired. No frontal nudity, whips, chains, trapeezes, or kinky three-somes. Not even a Clinton-Monica performance. The only gruesome part was the poor old guy getting his teeth pulled - WITHOUT anesthesia. That did nothing to satisfy my sexual curiosity. So if you want to see 19th century New Zealand with period costumes and American accents, go buy Mesmerized. It won't leave you that way, but it won't leave you broke either.
moonspinner55 One of Jodie Foster's post-Yale disasters (she flailed about in the mid-'80s, trying to find her footing before "The Accused" in 1988 got her on the right path). Young woman at the turn of the century arrives in New Zealand as the arranged bride for a man who turns out to be demented (and with bad teeth); in the second act, the husband dies and the wife stands accused. I have rarely seen a film that looked so unlike what it was trying to capture, with ugly, dulled-out color, poor lighting and ungainly costumes. Foster is a beautiful young woman, but she's hidden here behind an unattractive coif, speaking in a tuneless monotone. John Lithgow plays the unfortunate husband, but there wasn't much (if anything) the actor could do with this villainous rotter, the part being so pre-conceived. The sequence involving the extraction of Lithgow's teeth is excruciating and should clear a room faster than a fire alarm. An ungodly bore, "Mesmerized" was surprisingly co-produced by Foster, who later blamed the whole mess on the careless post-production editing. NO STARS from ****