Customer Reviews

Mary Higgins Clark: You Belong to Me

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Adaptations of Mary Higgins Clark's books range from the cheesy to the chilling, and fortunately "You Belong To Me" is closer to the "chilling" end of the spectrum. While it's a bit shaky on the psychological side of things, it's graced with a subtle string of clues, sedate tone, and some creepy murders -- as well as a romantic subplot that's never quite worked out.

Radio psychologist Dr. Susan Chancellor (Lesley-Anne Down) is doing a special show about women who have gone missing. Then a woman calls in about a man who may be involved with another woman's disappearance -- she has a picture of him, and a turquoise ring engraved with "You Belong To Me." But when she tries to bring Susan the ring and photos, she's knocked in front of a van.

Susan teams up with Detective Shea (Tony De Santis) to find out about the man who has caused at least three women's disappearances/deaths -- only to find that he is also murdering anyone who has seen him, or who has seen him buying the rings. And as Susan continues searching for the murderer, she doesn't realize that she's a lot closer to him than she thinks.

"You Belong To Me" is a fairly smooth TV-movie thriller, with a simple idea -- that a mystery man keeps killing lonely women to whom he gives turquoise rings, and whose murders are based on lines from the song "You Belong To Me." Simple idea, but tangling together a few other subplots (such as a crooked lawyer embezzling money) flesh it out nicely.

It's also directed in a quiet, genteel manner that's reminiscent of Clark's original novel -- some violence, not much blood, quite a few corpses, and a creepily harrowing climax. And it's pretty intriguing to follow the eerie search for a man who's carefully cleaning up all evidence of his crimes -- as well as wondering what motivations he might have had.

Flaws? Well, the identity of the murderer is a bit obvious when one considers the small cast, and Susan's romantic tension with one other guy is never quite resolved.

It also has a nice, low-key cast -- Lesley-Anne Down does a nice job as an intelligent, multitalented woman who gets pulled into investigating the murders, and it's pretty plausible how she follows the clues. Michelle Nolden has a fun smaller turn as Down's flirty fluffy sister, and De Santis is likably hard-nosed as the police detective. And a sexy Daniel Morgenroth has a good smallish role as an expert on missing women.

"You Belong To Me" is possibly the best adaptation of a Mary Higgins Clark novel -- a quiet and slow storyline, with little spurts of brutal murder.

Upfront I admit to a strong bias in favor of thIS film. Its much reiterated theme song, as well as motif running through the film's plot, is the song " You Belong to Me". Not a great song. A hit in its time. I am predisposed to anything associated with it since it was the song of the day, for many days, while I, too, was in distant climes, living under rather unpleasant conditions, with an interval, not quite daily, to hoist a few, or more than a few, while a Juke Box resonated with "See The Pyramids......". Memories aside, this is one of the best of the adaptations made of Mary Higgins Clark's books; not in terms of the book itself, which I have not read, but as it plays as a thing in itself. It has the usual contrivances and coincidences, but the plotting is less convoluted than usual, the scenes less melodramatic. This makes it a good, straightforward mystery, not on a par with a theatrical production, but as compared with the usual made for television product. The heroine is well played, good looking, but not with the particular shine of the usual (for Clark movies) young actress, the sister is such a type, but it fits the role she plays. The heroines buddy, the police officer, is also better fitted for the role than usual, while supporting cast are varied in their suitability for their roles. In support, the women get the better of the roles, and make the most of it.
All-in-all, I can recommend this for an evening in which light entertainment with some mystery and mild suspense, is called for. Oh, yes, and with a hypnotizing melody running throughout, hypnotizing, at least, to one who was around when it was first topping the charts.

I alwaysed loved her on soaps . I absoulutley cant wait to watch the movie. I havent gotten around 2 it. I will cause I love her. she is a beautiful woman. I love those types of actresses. Thanks.

Strange movie indeed. A radio show that turns deadly because it brings up a case of international serial killing that had escaped the attention of the police, of many polices. It is this sloppiness that is surprising. The film is based on this sloppiness as a normal syndrome with police forces. They jump to the easiest explanation, always, as if the profiling technique did not exist or was too hard to use for simple-minded crime collectors, or is it human trash collectors? But this film, the third of a series, seems to carry a pattern: the criminal is some kind of rather inactive and idle person, rich by heritage and thus able to do nothing, except to run after his neurotic paranoia about rich women who are not interested in him, though he is rich. But here Clark uses again the psychologist that is writing a book, this time on a particular type of women who disappear in cruises. But this time, and this is a change with the case in the second film of the series (Loves music, Loves to dance), he is not the criminal. But we seem to be turning around the same evil in society, as if idleness bred and nurtured crime. Decent entertainment but too simple to be fascinating or outstanding. Unluckily, because serial killers are a lot more complex than that. In fact they are not simply psychotic or neurotic, at least not in that paranoid plain way. They need a very complex and rich mental and virtual construction that turns their criminal acts into acts of justice. Is a song enough for that kind of crime? I don't believe it. It has to be deeper and more sophisticated because serial killers are super brains, or they would not even succeed in their first attempt at killing someone. And they are repetitively successful. So.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne