An Offensive Thriller Decides Streaming Revenge Is Best Served Cold- Armessa Movie News

The 1990s is often fondly remembered as the glory days of the adult-skewing mid budget thriller, a bespoke form of cinema that would almost always see a talented cast and a proven director team up for some sort of legal or procedural investigation. It’s a dying art today, but the response to Eye for an Eye indicated that ticking so many boxes isn’t a guarantee of success or acclaim.

Directed by John Schlesinger, the film ended up bombing at the box office after earning only $27 million from theaters on a $20 million budget, with an eight percent Rotten Tomatoes approval rating hammering home the discontent. Despite the best efforts of Sally Field, Kiefer Sutherland, Ed Harris, Joe Mantegna, Keith David, and many more, Eye for an Eye was a shambles.

The story finds Field’s character on the phone with her daughter when Sutherland’s intruder breaks into her home and murders the girl. However, he’s released on a technicality following his arrest, spurring the vengeful matriarch into action to dish out some good old-fashioned vigilante justice, with her methods raising more than a few eyebrows to go along with the critical drubbing.

Deemed as “unpleasant,” “manipulative,” “nasty,” “intellectually corrupt,” “exploitative,” and plenty other glowing terms besides, the widespread trashing hasn’t dissuaded streaming subscribers from checking it out. In fact, more than a quarter of a century on from its release, and FlixPatrol has revealed Eye for an Eye as one of Paramount Plus’ most-watched titles, with the bad buzz working in its favor long after the fact.

About the author

Scott Campbell

News, reviews, interviews. To paraphrase Keanu Reeves; Words. Lots of words.