arson83 I got this movie because I worked at a movie store so I got free rentals. It came in, and the cover made it look alright. Hot chick, carrying a weapon, alright, I'll check it out.Oh man, bad move. This was so horrible, I spent half the movie watching in fast-forward to get to the nudity, which was minimal. I think MAYBE three scenes of partial nudity.Cheesy dialogue, crappy violence, poor excuses of characters. I feel bad putting this movie down, because I know it was made on a cheap budget, but so was "Clerks" and it became a cult classic and a franchise.2/10.

ScreenDreams As one other IMDB reviewer has remarked, this movie starts a bit slow, but gets considerably better as it goes along. Yes, it is released by Roger Corman, and yes, it goes over some of the same thematic ground as much higher budget predecessors such as FATAL ATTRACTION and POISON IVY. However, the juxtapositioning of the wife's career as a rising blues singer against the husband's gathering loneliness and his almost Freudian need for filling the emotional and physical "void" or "hole" while she's away along with the clever use of minimal effects and settings is nicely done. Utilizing a very small number of locations and characters, and also using water in almost every scene both as a cleansing and drowning metaphorical symbol throughout, this movie, though clearly suffering from a minuscule budget, reminds me in many ways of the more fully realized and more recent scenario, namely the French film "SWIMMING POOL" which it seems to me at least may have borrowed liberally some useful ideas from "UP AGAINST AMANDA." With a smaller tool set, UP AGAINST AMANDA maintains its suspense with a rudimentary, fatalistic view of surrendering to ones occasional lustful temptations, but accomplishes this as well or better as other films in this genre. The twist of the stepfather abuse of Amanda in the past (again, very Freudian) is also very unique in this genre and interesting. I agree with other viewers about the unexpected and sympathetic reaction for Amanda's plight this aspect of the story elicits. The cast is excellent I think.

Love2U This movie was released by Roger Corman, so you know that the filmmakers didn't have much money to work with.Although, some viewers may miss the subtleties in this movie because of the very typical "obsessed killer" type marketing approach, there are unique differences about this movie.AMANDA, as played by the obviously talented Justine Priestley, is a complex character. Some people like these movies precisely because the violence can seem random, but here the ramifications of past abuse (dealt with in a realistic but tasteful manner) are what shape the psychosis of AMANDA. Surprisingly, Amanda redeems herself at the end with an act of love, where most of these movies turn into the typical, all out fight to the death and the evil character dies just as evil in the end as to begin with.Some rough edges in this picture, but I have to give it 7 out of 10 stars based on its thoughtfulness and yes, originality as compared to the usual -- especially on a budget.

MovieLooker I saw this movie when it first came out. It was an official selection for the Temecula Valley International Film Festival and I voted for it for best picture.Justine Priestley is hot as the psychotic, but complex Amanda. This is not your ordinary psycho movie. Lots of interesting and original slants on the genre. Sort of a "Fatal Attraction" for the younger set with some great blues music mixed in as the object of Amanda's affection is married to an up and coming blues singer who has less time for her husband as her career takes off.