It's 1880 New Zealand. Victoria (Jodie Foster) is on trial. She recalls her journey to that point. As a baby, she was dropped off at an orphanage. Growing up at the orphanage, she is introduced to merchant Oliver Thompson (John Lithgow) who quickly proposes. She marries the stranger and discovers that he's a controlling, volatile creep. His father is more of the same but his brother George is much more sensitive.

The first half is perfectly fine. It's got the bad husband and brutalized young wife. It builds to a tense climatic moment halfway through. It does struggle to maintain that intensity in the second half. There is some ambiguity to the plot which does not really help. It needs to be tightened. It probably should turn into a trial movie with flashbacks. Although Jodie Foster was still in her early 20s, the character needs to be a teen and the closing text reveals the inspiration to be the trial of a 19 year old wife. Her vulnerability would be heighten with a younger actress. The movie seems to be holding back which prevents it from being better.

Somehow, this Mill Creek set has a Jodie Foster movie on it. Not a TV movie or something from her past, but a 1986 Jodie Foster movie where she plays Victoria, an orphaned girl who is married to the much older Oliver Thompson (John Lithgow!) and sent away to school. When she comes back, years later, she realizes that her husband and most of his family are all deranged.

A co-production between Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom and United States with RKO Pictures, this was released in the U.S. as My Letter to George and Shocked in other areas, which is a great title but if I saw it with that name, I would have been furious that such a great name was used to describe a period film.

Perhaps most astoundingly, this was written and directed by Michael Laughlin, who wrote and directed two of my favorite movies, Strange Behavior and Strange Invaders.

Loosely based on that of Adelaide Bartlett, who was put to trial in 1886 for the chloroform poisoning of her husband, this feels like the kind of film where the story of how Foster got on board, much less decided to be a producer, feels like it would be more interesting than the movie that I just watched.

One of Jodie Foster's post-Yale disasters (she flailed about in the mid-'80s, trying to find her footing before "The Accused" in 1988 got her on the right path). Young woman at the turn of the century arrives in New Zealand as the arranged bride for a man who turns out to be demented (and with bad teeth); in the second act, the husband dies and the wife stands accused. I have rarely seen a film that looked so unlike what it was trying to capture, with ugly, dulled-out color, poor lighting and ungainly costumes. Foster is a beautiful young woman, but she's hidden here behind an unattractive coif, speaking in a tuneless monotone. John Lithgow plays the unfortunate husband, but there wasn't much (if anything) the actor could do with this villainous rotter, the part being so pre-conceived. The sequence involving the extraction of Lithgow's teeth is excruciating and should clear a room faster than a fire alarm. An ungodly bore, "Mesmerized" was surprisingly co-produced by Foster, who later blamed the whole mess on the careless post-production editing. NO STARS from ****