See For Me can now be streamed on Netflix and is also available for digital download. As the story goes, Sophie, a retired champion skier, is house sitting at a lonely mansion for a client. It seems to be the only building in sight for miles.
However, it happens that the house is broken into by three robbers who are either aware of or are seeking a place containing a safe which is not conspicuous yet. Sophie is in danger as she tries to conceal herself and not be captured.
Not for the first time, the audience faces the theme of a home invasion but this time, along with soppy drama, they have a very proper and believable twist, Sophie is without sight. It is not new that such movies as Hush and Wait Until Dark depict the chances of survival of disabled characters, but that several movies have already done so in the past is hardly a cause for concern. As long as the aforementioned thrillers later deliver an outcome, there is still scope for drama even in the face of repetitiveness.
Unfortunately, this is not the case with See For Me. It’s not terrible by all means but it is rather mundane. There is nothing really surprising in what follows because the story meanders towards its ending, there are no interesting shots from the camera or unexpected movements in the story line, so there is a big chance that one may find it all pretty tedious.
The film does however however feature one clever device. Whenever she goes online seeking help from a sighted individual, she opens an app called ‘See For Me’, which proves handy when she wants to locate the position of the robbers.
And on the other side of the app is Kelly, a combat veteran turned ‘seeing eye person’ for reasons unknown, who does this on her off days from the military. She likes to play online shooting games like Call of Duty too, so she’s pretty accustomed to instructing someone through a headset from the other side.
In my opinion, the app was a smart addition as it brings something fresh to an old concept. However, it should have been better employed if the individual at the other end of the camera was not such an expert shot. I see why she was given this background, but in my opinion, the scriptwriters could have left it out as it eliminates any chance of tension.
It would have been more interesting if the lazy 9 to 5 slacker that Sophie spoke with had no clue as to how to deal with home invaders. But as Kelly has the ability to put the invaders on the defensive, and we never come remotely close to feeling sorry for the blind girl whose life is allegedly at risk.
The narrative has some additional flaws as well. The first question also is where is the blind woman with a cat living in a big house? Surely this is a risk assessment accident waiting to occur as, although Sophie barely gets a short guided tour throughout the mansion, she has no idea what lies in her path. And who informed the thieves about that money locked in the safe? Unless I drifted off in the middle of the movie (which is quite possible), I failed to understand how to this question. The movie pushes the boundaries of logic and in parts it is tiresome waiting for it to finish.
For this reason even with all the faults surrounding her, Sophie is hard to cheer for and has to be resolved her issues. Skyler Davenport the actress who depicts Sophie however gives a satisfactory performance though and since she is legally blind, somehow this strengthens the film more than it otherwise would have been.
The protagonist of the film expressed her opinion about Samantha and remarked that it is difficult to sympathise with her when for the first half of the film she is both mean and unpleasant. There’s also a case of Samantha attempting theft from her supervisor which makes it even harder to support her when things go awry. Regardless, she is at least relatable instead of an angel that the audience is forced to support.
She becomes almost unrecognizable, doesn’t she? And it’s all thanks to Jessica Parker Kennedy who depicts Kelly, the lady supporting Sophie in “See For Me”. Despite shooting in one location for the majority of her scenes, Kelly figures out how to effectively use her limited resources. As for the actors portraying the thieving character, it’s very odd, they play creepy proficiently, but with a scant plot to showcase their talents.
From an aesthetic point of view, the film is not that particularly distinguishable so it at times feels more like a telemovie. The mansion is indeed pretty but is never well executed within the narrative to create any tension or fear. Alfred Hitchcock and various other renowned directors would have employed more panoramic views of the steps and other parts of the house to emphasize the proportions of the house, and the sense of shadows would have been utilized for effect. Sadly, there is very little of that in this film.
As for the characters in a home invasion thriller, their creativeness needs to be infused with a sense of underlying threat. To our surprise, this movie fails on both those two concerns hence, there is not much to witness here. While you probably will not complain about the film if all you are after is a time waster for 90 minutes, there will most likely not come a time when you are on the edge of your seat with the action that is being portrayed on the screen.
For More Movies Visit Putlocker.