***What if your stepfather is a psycho?***

After an amiable man (Dylan Walsh) slays his family he starts a new one under a different identity in Portland, Oregon, but his discerning stepson (Penn Badgley) picks up on his dark side. Sela Ward plays the psycho’s new fiancé while Amber Heard is on hand as the stepson’s girlfriend.

"The Stepfather" (2009) is a solid crime drama/thriller with a bit o' slasher horror, a combination of the original film (1987) and its sequel (1989). All of the Stepfather flicks are loosely based on mass murderer John List. They contain elements of movies like "Psycho" (1960/1998) mixed with coming-of-age drama, like “Fright Night” (1985) and “Disturbia” (2007).

Walsh effectively portrays the delusional titular character while Badgley is competent as the teen protagonist. Meanwhile the director takes every opportunity to show Heard in a bikini or underwear, but she’s way too thin to stir much interest despite her obvious attractiveness. She’s more appealing after she acquired some curves, e.g. as Mera in “Aquaman” (2018).

At the end of the day this is an updated, slightly more compelling version of the first film and its sequel. There are just enough changes to make it worthwhile if you’re familiar with the prior flicks. On the downside, it’s a little predictable, but what else is new?

The film runs 1 hour, 40 minutes, and was shot in Los Angeles & Santa Clarita, California (with studio work done in Culver City).

GRADE: B+

After I added this to my watchedlist I saw that it was a remake and was curious to compare the two.

==**2009 rating of 7 vs 1987 rating of 3.**==

In my opinion, the 1987 one isn't really worth the time overall. Both movies have the same basic premise of [spoiler]"dude slaughters the family he married into, changes his identity, and marries into a new one to do it all over again" [/spoiler]but otherwise, they are actually different stories.

Various similarities are definitely there, but they are small details and not the story itself. Some details were the same, but also entirely different. An example being that [spoiler]in the original the kid wants to go to boarding school to get away from home, and in the remake the kid has just come back from boarding school and wants to stay home.[/spoiler]

This 2009 one had good pacing and kept my interest with excitement and suspense. The 1987 version dragged on for me and it was about 12 minutes shorter in run time than this one. If the two storylines were more similar I would have chalked it up to me being bored by already knowing what to expect, but I really didn't; that's how different they were.

Both films have their own pros and cons, for sure. There are aspects about the original that were better than this remake (which I'll actually specify over on that review,) but also vice versa. They both failed with their overly gratuitous scenes, especially the 1987 one.

[spoiler]Also, the mothers in both films were pretty dull characters.[/spoiler]

The biggest flaw of this movie was [spoiler]that Amber Heard's character was super annoying and I was so relieved to read that I'm not the only person who thinks so. [insert snarkier, cleverer comment than everyone else about her lack of clothes and personality][/spoiler]