Also known by the title, Private Property, L.A Seduction calls back to the thrillers of the mid-to-late nineties. Kathryn (Ashley Benson), is a struggling actress. She spends her days alone in her Laurel Canyon mansion, doing laps in her pool and feeling sorry for herself. As luxurious as her life appears on the outside, Kathryn is unfulfilled and restless. Then one day her regular gardener is deported and his replacement, Ben (Shiloh Fernandez), changes everything.
Ben presents Kathryn with something that she hasn't had in a long time: a captive audience. Her husband is always working and she has been starved of attention. Ben gives her the companionship and sensitivity she has been craving. Their attraction to one another is immediate and as Kathryn begins to be tempted by Ben, the introduction of her new neighbour, Ed (Logan Miller), reveals that Ben is not as honest as he seems.
The plot of L.A Seduction is nothing new. Anyone familiar with films such as Wild Things, Cruel Intentions, Poison Ivy, and so on will see where the story is headed long before it gets there. That's not to diminish the work of the cast or director Chadd Harbold. L.A Seduction is an adaptation of Leslie Stevens 1960 screenplay Private Property, which accounts for some of the similarity to other sources. As it stands, it can only be viewed as a throwback to those films and one that doesn't fully commit to itself. The build-up is well realised, but the execution of the reveal is clunky.
After exposing an aspect of the truth, the film rewinds several days to fill in the other side of the story. This explanation goes to excessive lengths to reveal itself, almost akin to being beaten over the head with a hammer. Harbold wants to ensure the viewer knows what is happening. The problem though is that the plot is not that complicated and the over explanation kills the pace or tension previously created. Once the flashback connects back to the main story, it takes a few moments to recall where things were left, another ill effect of the long winded exposition. For the finale, L.A Seduction further flounders, and as hard as Benson and Fernandez try, they fail to push things back on track.
It is during the climax of L.A Seduction that Harbold starts to experiment visually. Up until this point the aesthetic of the film is clean and modern. This reflects the pristine house that Kathryn resides in. By the end the camerawork suddenly morphs to become wilder, with applied coloured filters. Whilst these are an exciting new addition, they seem to come out of left field. One could argue that the look of the film mirrors the character that is being followed; Kathryn is prim and proper, Ben more intense, but if that is the intent, it is not fully realised.
Where L.A Seduction thrives is in its casting. Benson and Fernandez commit fully to their characters. Neither character is a stretch for either actor, Kathryn and Ben being echoes of previous roles, but their familiarity with the personality types makes them engaging to watch. The story hinges on the viability of the pair as a partnership and their chemistry sizzles. From their first instance on screen together they look and feel their parts. Watching them circle each other as Kathryn and Ben provides the brunt of the excitement of L.A Seduction. Sadly, the lack of finesse in some aspects of the plot detracts and somewhat dilutes their hard work.
An archetypal rehash of a familiar story from yesteryear, L.A Seduction fails to fully reignite audience interest in the near forgotten sub-genre of film.
Signature Entertainment presents L.A. Seduction on Digital Platforms 21st November.
