A. Waller Hastings
Northern State University
Aberdeen, SD  57401

Hide and Seek

       We are well into the midwinter “thriller” season – that part of the film going calendar when the major aim of nine out of 10 films is to scare you silly, with little demand for deep thought on the viewer’s part.
            With so many films clamoring for audience attention, it’s hard to rise above the throng, but Hide and Seek manages to stand out, mostly thanks to an unusually seasoned cast. Even the youngest cast member, 10-year-old Dakota Fanning, is a veteran of a dozen or so major films and numerous TV guest spots.
            Fanning plays Emily Callaway, a young girl whose mother has apparently committed suicide.  Witnessing the discovery of her mother’s body so traumatizes her that her psychologist father (Robert DeNiro) decides to take her to a new home in the country, away from the memories of their New York home.
            Anyone familiar with this genre will immediately recognize this as a bad mistake.  In their upstate retreat, Emily’s withdrawal from the world only becomes more severe.  She spends her time sitting on her bed, staring into space, mutilating dolls, and talking about her new friend, the apparently invisible “Charlie.”  For much of the film, she appears emotionally numb, an affectless cipher.
           
Fanning’s large, luminous eyes and pale face make her the ideal physical embodiment of this kind of spooky child, and her instincts in yet another strong role are sure.  She is the standout child star of her generation – is she really only 10?
            Although he is supposedly an outstanding psychologist, her father has no clue how to handle his daughter’s trauma, and approaches her more as his patient than his daughter.  The part calls for DeNiro, too, to be more emotionally subdued for much of the film than we are accustomed to seeing him. Since most of the focus is on the father and daughter, their emotional emptiness initially slows the film down.
            As “Charlie’s” actions become more threatening, however, the pace of the action picks up, along with the body count – Charlie, it seems, is a cold-blooded killer.  We remain in the dark as to “Charlie’s” true nature until very near the end – is he the somewhat creepy neighbor? A ghost? A supernatural manifestation of Emily’s anger?  Emily herself?
            The answer to Charlie’s identity, when it comes, is obvious enough, but the plot is so well executed, the questions about Charlie so well kept in play, that the unveiling still caught me off guard.  With Charlie’s unmasking, the formerly restrained actors let loose an emotional torrent, while the plot focus switches to whether he can be stopped before everyone ends up dead.
            DeNiro and Fanning carry most of the responsibility for keeping viewers engaged, but they get support from that experienced cast, including Amy Irving in a small role as the mother, Famke Janssen (X-Men) as Dr. Callaway’s protégé (though her character, and their relationship, remain frustratingly undeveloped), and Elizabeth Shue as Callaway’s new love interest.
            The casting exposes a significant flaw in the movie, however.  Shue and Janssen, both 20 years younger than DeNiro, are too young to be convincingly attracted to the world-weary Callaway. Although DeNiro is a great actor, he is too old for this part; he looks (and acts) more like Emily’s grandfather than her father, and never convincingly clicks as a parent to Fanning.  

This review appeared in the Aberdeen American News on January 30, 2005.

Return to Wally Hastings's Film Reviews.
Return to Wally Hastings's Home Page.

This page last updated on January 29, 2005.