Yes, Jurassic Park used computer generated images very well. However, they had a big budget and were able to make those dinosaurs look very realistic. This one ended up making very bad images of hell and of weird crap that looked as if it were not there. Jeff Goldblum was in both, coincidence? Yes, but still he was in one of the best examples of early computer images and one of the worst. What makes it more terrible is that a lot of horror movies began doing it, and to this day the monsters in these movies still look like they are not there. So the story in this one has two guys dying and being revived by similar means. One a family guy with a daughter, the other guy...well lets just say he is not so good. The guy who is not so good has a secret about his death, he is also a killer. The other guy (Goldblum) seems to have a link to this killer because of the way they were both revived. Near the end the killer targets the teen daughter and the father must try to pry her from this seemingly evil guy's clutches. Just did not really work for me, and apparently not to Dean Koontz either as I hear he did not like this movie at all. It has a somewhat good cast for a horror movie as along with Goldblum you have Alicia Silverstone and Alfred Molino, but one just can not get the lame effects out of one's head.

POSSIBLE SPOILERS HEREIN! Note also that although I personally shun the lengthy review, in this particular case (my first review in fact), I have written a long one myself, for reasons that will become obvious.PLEASE BE ADVISED:1) Do not see this film (it is that bad – the details in a jiffy); and 2) When you have done so (seen not this film), it is safe to return here and read the rest of this review.Now that you have complied with the above, let me begin by saying that this is one of those movies that, initially, is just passable enough, in spite of the leaps of faith (suspensions of disbelief) that are required of you, not to turn you definitively off before the plot, initially, begins to suck you in (don't worry, it will soon repel you – oops! – make that "would soon have repelled you").Or maybe I should begin by saying that this is one of those movies that you would normally never be tempted to see, and that the only reason you finally seriously considered seeing it (on that movie channel that regularly shows this film, along with a smattering of other repeats) was because there was nothing else particularly interesting on the other channels, yet you were determined to see a movie on the tele on that occasion, and further, none of the films in your video collection beckoned to you, nor were you of a mind to leave your abode in search of a rental.The main two problems with this film, apart from the fact that none of the actors, except for the chap who played the minuscule part of the police detective (I remember him best as Dr. Watson in a Sherlock Holmes series), are capable of rising above the mediocre, are A) The protagonist's journey to the beyond and back relies too heavily on graphic portrayal rather than on suggestion (and this graphic rendering of the soul's maze-like journey (the eyes are the conduit) through the synapses that are presumed to connect this world with the beyond – which journey was replaced throughout the middle section of the film with the capacity of the two linked characters (see the plot summary), once the hook-up was firmly established, to see through each other's eyes – returns with a vengeance towards the end of the film, where it degenerates into a cheap, deus-ex-machina ploy), and B) The implausibilities accumulate at an exponential rate, causing first fidgeting, then red ears, then outright shame accompanied by nausea (to take a simple example, since each of the two linked characters knows that the other can see through his eyes, why give important details away like addresses that can easily be traced? – but of course, without these dumb mistakes, the dumb plot couldn't advance to the dumb ending!). If this film begins at the top of the hour on your movie channel (assuming that you decided to ignore my advice in (1) above), then at roughly the top of the next hour you will find yourself zapping over to catch the stale news headlines, just like I did. After that I zapped elsewhere, but found no alternative worth watching. Having, in the meantime, invested so much time in this crappy film, I decided that I should at least catch the ending so that I could piece the storyline together, however bad it was (one feels guilty for having invested so much time in so much froth, yet one feels equally guilty at not seeing it through, since the hope is that by being able to piece the storyline together, one will have salvaged the time already invested... this is not unlike the manner in which Brer Rabbit found himself hopelessly stuck in the tar!).I missed huge parts of the film between the 58th and 100th minutes (it is 105 minutes long, circa), then came back in time to catch the ludicrous (and ludicrously graphic) climax (but given the absurdity of the build-up that the bad guy's hideaway itself represents – which part, granted, I only caught in snatches – something far-fetched was required to cap off this story). I skipped the ending, which I am sure was dopey... one must cut one's losses however one can. After a film like this, nothing hits the spot like a good, sudsy bath!

~Spoiler~Hideaway is a fairly lackluster attempt to bring Dean Koontz to the big screen. Koontz' adaptations are rarely successful. Most of the films "based" on his work tear everything in his stories apart. This film is no different. But strictly as a movie, it's still bland and nothing worth seeing again. Jeremy Sisto and Jeff Goldblum's characters have both had near death experiences and are brought back with a connection. They can both see through one another's eyes now. A good explanation of this is never given. Also, a good reason is never given as to how the good doctors were able to bring Goldblum back to life after being clinically dead for 120 minutes. I guess we're just supposed to chalk that up to the supernatural. Back to the story, Sisto is a deranged killer and Goldblum wants to stop him. That's about all there is here. Alfred Molina is wasted and Alicia Silverstone, thankfully, doesn't have too much screen time. The ending is very cheesy as are most of the effects. You can tell this is from the same guy that directed Virtuosity and The Lawnmower Man.

Well, this is a very formulaic treatment of what could have been a good movie. Unfortunately, the good actors did a really rotten job of acting, and I'm sure the director is incompetent. With such classics as The Lawnmower Man and Virtuosity to his credit, Brett Leonard has managed no better than 5.3/10 on IMDB, yet he's been doing this for at least 15 years. So much for learning. What makes me bitter isn't that it's such a bad movie, it's that I'm too stubborn to turn it off. I hate giving bad ratings to a movie I didn't at least finish. Fair is fair. Oh good grief. This is just too stupid... Finally! Thank goodness it's over. Bah.