At the beginning, we (the audience) come to know that one of the two twin sister is (could be) the murderer, but we can't tell which.
At the end we come to know that one of the twin sisters, Terry, is "crazy", but we altogether cannot tell which one is the murderer!
A certain doctor Peralta has been killed, one night, as he was in company of his lover, Terry. Terry tells her twin sister Ruth that she has been with him that night, but has not killed him. Ruth believes her. The sisters don't want the police to know that Terry was with Peralta in the night of the murder, which could be at least embarassing to them. They are undistinguishable twins, so they concert a sort of tricky cross-alibi by which no one of them can legally be charged.
The only person who can tell Terry from Ruth is psychologist Dr. Scott Elliott, and he tells us (the audience) and the police, that, following his celebrated studies on twins, one of the two sisters is "crazy" (schizofrenic, I don't remember the word...) but, again, one cannot tell which. What a pity! We would have liked to have come by ourselves at the same conclusion, if only a chance had been given us. But no, the psychologist has spoiled it.
Yes, Terry's behaviour has been depicted, in the movie, as more and more strange and suspicious, letting us know that she must have been the "crazy" one. Double pity! We are once more deprived of our own endeavour of judging by ourselves, in presence of facts. No. Again, someone (the psychologist, the great spoiler) had to suggest us the (probably) right answer. That's the opposite of what a crime/mystery plot should do.
At the end, in a series of convincing scenes, we see, without doubts, that Terry is the "crazy" one. A white-clad paramedic is behind her, and the police all around. We still don't see while a "crazy" person should be a murderer. We have as little evidence as we had at the beginning. And the film ends here.
7 stars: it's quite entertaining. I don't see what a dark mirror has to do with the whole thing.
At the end we come to know that one of the twin sisters, Terry, is "crazy", but we altogether cannot tell which one is the murderer!
A certain doctor Peralta has been killed, one night, as he was in company of his lover, Terry. Terry tells her twin sister Ruth that she has been with him that night, but has not killed him. Ruth believes her. The sisters don't want the police to know that Terry was with Peralta in the night of the murder, which could be at least embarassing to them. They are undistinguishable twins, so they concert a sort of tricky cross-alibi by which no one of them can legally be charged.
The only person who can tell Terry from Ruth is psychologist Dr. Scott Elliott, and he tells us (the audience) and the police, that, following his celebrated studies on twins, one of the two sisters is "crazy" (schizofrenic, I don't remember the word...) but, again, one cannot tell which. What a pity! We would have liked to have come by ourselves at the same conclusion, if only a chance had been given us. But no, the psychologist has spoiled it.
Yes, Terry's behaviour has been depicted, in the movie, as more and more strange and suspicious, letting us know that she must have been the "crazy" one. Double pity! We are once more deprived of our own endeavour of judging by ourselves, in presence of facts. No. Again, someone (the psychologist, the great spoiler) had to suggest us the (probably) right answer. That's the opposite of what a crime/mystery plot should do.
At the end, in a series of convincing scenes, we see, without doubts, that Terry is the "crazy" one. A white-clad paramedic is behind her, and the police all around. We still don't see while a "crazy" person should be a murderer. We have as little evidence as we had at the beginning. And the film ends here.
7 stars: it's quite entertaining. I don't see what a dark mirror has to do with the whole thing.