The Rewatchables

'What Lies Beneath’ With Bill Simmons, Chris Ryan, and Mallory Rubin

January 14, 2026

Key Takeaways Copied to clipboard!

  • The hosts are rewatching the 2000 film 'What Lies Beneath' as part of a move to match content with Netflix, noting its blend of erotic thriller elements with a prominent haunted house/ghost story structure. 
  • Harrison Ford's performance is highly praised for his chemistry with Michelle Pfeiffer and his subtle 'hand acting,' though the trailer is criticized for spoiling the major twist involving Ford being the killer. 
  • Michelle Pfeiffer's performance in 'What Lies Beneath' is considered a career high point, representing her peak powers and a successful return to form after a perceived slump in the late 1990s. 
  • The discussion highlighted the film's effective use of subtle foreshadowing (Chekhov's Gun) through various objects and plot points that become vital later, contrasting with its overly obvious symbolism (like the pendant design). 
  • Harrison Ford's surprisingly chiseled physique at age 57 in *What Lies Beneath* was a recurring point of discussion, leading to the creation of an 'Inappropriate Body Award' category. 
  • The hosts debated the film's classification as an erotic thriller, ultimately concluding it was too unerotic, and noted that the lack of cell phone technology in the plot is a defining '2000s thing.' 
  • The discussion on *What Lies Beneath* focused heavily on plot holes, specifically why the ghost of Madison waited a year to begin haunting Claire and Norman, and how the haunting mechanics rely entirely on the presence of the bathtub. 
  • Norman Spencer is deemed a terrible murderer due to his failure to properly dispose of Madison's belongings, particularly her necklace near his dock, earning him a 'Coach Finstock, Mr. Miyagi award' for worst life lesson. 
  • The hosts debated who 'won' the movie, ultimately settling on Michelle Pfeiffer, while also expressing discomfort with seeing Harrison Ford play an evil character, comparing it to seeing beloved actors in roles that violate audience expectations. 

Segments

Movie Genre and Pacing
Copied to clipboard!
(00:04:58)
  • Key Takeaway: ‘What Lies Beneath’ transitions from a 90s erotic thriller into a 2000s high-concept haunted house story, making it palatable for horror-averse viewers.
  • Summary: The film is more of a haunted house ghost story than a pure erotic thriller, categorized as the ultimate family horror movie akin to ‘Poltergeist’ because it is spooky but not prohibitively scary. The first hour is noted as being slow, demanding close attention to visual clues, leading to a suggested runtime reduction of 15 minutes.
Harrison Ford’s Career Phase
Copied to clipboard!
(00:07:02)
  • Key Takeaway: ‘What Lies Beneath’ marks the end of Harrison Ford’s late prime era of major starring roles before a noticeable lull in output.
  • Summary: The film is considered the last major movie of Ford’s late prime, preceding a phase that included ‘Six Days, Seven Nights’ and ‘Random Hearts.’ Listeners debate his best chemistry pairings, with ‘Witness’ still ranking highly, and acknowledge his recent resurgence in projects like ‘1923’ and ‘Dial of Destiny.’
Michelle Pfeiffer’s Performance
Copied to clipboard!
(00:12:07)
  • Key Takeaway: Michelle Pfeiffer’s look and performance in this film represent her peak of confidence and flawlessness, comparable to a ‘GOAT’ athlete in a championship moment.
  • Summary: Pfeiffer’s appearance is deemed astonishing, marking a successful comeback after several less successful films in the late 1990s like ‘One Fine Day’ and ‘The Story of Us.’ Her chemistry with Ford is rated near perfect, and her possession scenes are highlighted as the most rewatchable moments of the film.
Trailer Spoilers and Director’s Intent
Copied to clipboard!
(00:08:17)
  • Key Takeaway: The movie’s trailer completely spoiled the central twist—that Harrison Ford is the killer—which director Robert Zemeckis reportedly welcomed to reduce audience worry.
  • Summary: The hosts express jealousy for those who watched the film unspoiled, contrasting this with the era of major twist reveals like ‘The Sixth Sense’ and ‘The Usual Suspects.’ Zemeckis’s philosophy is that knowing the twist allows audiences to enjoy the technical execution rather than worrying about the outcome.
Supporting Cast and Production Facts
Copied to clipboard!
(00:22:20)
  • Key Takeaway: The film features several notable character actors, including James Reimar, who is considered a top ’that guy’ actor, and Clark Gregg, who later wrote the screenplay.
  • Summary: James Reimar is highlighted as a standout supporting actor, and the hosts discuss the strangeness of Clark Gregg (Agent Coulson) having written the script for this horror film. Production notes reveal Zemeckis filmed ‘What Lies Beneath’ concurrently with ‘Castaway,’ using the same crew while Tom Hanks grew his beard.
Rewatchable Scenes Analysis
Copied to clipboard!
(00:34:34)
  • Key Takeaway: The dinner double date scene and Michelle Pfeiffer’s possessed sequence are the most rewatchable moments, contrasting with the slow setup of the first 25 minutes.
  • Summary: The dinner scene is praised for its crosstalk and clue-dropping, while the scene where Pfeiffer’s character embraces her darker side is cited as her best moment. The dog, Cooper, is singled out for excellent performance in sensing danger, particularly during the bathroom scare.
Setting and Critical Reception
Copied to clipboard!
(00:26:47)
  • Key Takeaway: The Vermont setting contributes to the film’s atmosphere, fitting a pattern of Hollywood productions utilizing the remote New England area for unsettling stories.
  • Summary: The film’s location in Vermont is noted as gorgeous but also a place where ‘all bets are off,’ fitting a trope seen in other media. Critically, the film received mixed reviews (49% on Rotten Tomatoes), with Roger Ebert calling the ending a ‘morass of absurdity,’ though the hosts feel it has aged into a better ’throw-it-on’ hang.
Rewatchable Scenes and 2000s Tech
Copied to clipboard!
(00:47:04)
  • Key Takeaway: The dinner scene was cited as a highly rewatchable moment, while the lack of cell phone cameras and reliance on landline redial defined the movie’s early 2000s setting.
  • Summary: The dinner scene was identified as a top rewatchable moment, second only to the scene where Michelle Pfeiffer’s character is possessed at the desk. The reliance on slow modem speeds, driving for cell signal, and hitting redial on a landline were cited as defining technological limitations of the year 2000.
Amanda Dobbins Real Estate Award
Copied to clipboard!
(00:47:37)
  • Key Takeaway: The Spencer residence, a 3,500 sq. ft. Nantucket style home built in Addison, Vermont, featured five different bathrooms due to extensive filming in that area.
  • Summary: The house used for filming was a custom-built, 3,500 square foot Nantucket style home located on the banks of Lake Champlain in Addison, Vermont. The production utilized five different bathrooms because so much filming occurred within them. Sadly, the house was torn down after filming concluded.
Harrison Ford’s Casting Irony
Copied to clipboard!
(00:48:38)
  • Key Takeaway: Casting Harrison Ford as a character who tries to kill his wife is ironic given his previous role in The Fugitive where he was wrongly accused of killing his wife.
  • Summary: The casting of Harrison Ford is noted for its thematic irony, contrasting his role here with his character in The Fugitive. Director Robert Zemeckis subtly used camera movement to mimic a ghost’s point-of-view, following Michelle Pfeiffer’s character.
Successful Subtle Foreshadowing
Copied to clipboard!
(00:49:24)
  • Key Takeaway: The film successfully utilized Chekhov’s Gun elements, including the paralyzing agent, the mystery key, and the newspaper clipping, ensuring these details proved vital in the final act.
  • Summary: The successful use of foreshadowing included seemingly minor details like the paralyzing agent, the mystery key, and the newspaper clipping from the DuPont chair night. These elements were shown because they were guaranteed to be vital in the final stretch of the movie.
On-the-Nose Symbolism Analysis
Copied to clipboard!
(00:50:25)
  • Key Takeaway: The movie features highly effective, though obvious, symbolism, such as the ‘Sleeping Dog’ shop name and the Georgia O’Keefe-esque design of the pendant resembling a heart, flower, and vagina.
  • Summary: The film employs symbolism that is ‘Symbolism 101’ but deemed effective, including the shop named ‘Sleeping Dog.’ The pendant worn by the mistress featured a design merging a heart, flower, and vagina, and the key had a Celtic knot symbolizing unending life.
Bathroom Scenes and Fatal Attraction Comparison
Copied to clipboard!
(00:51:35)
  • Key Takeaway: The movie features numerous dangerous bathroom scenes, leading to a comparison with Fatal Attraction, whose lead character’s act of feeding spaghetti meatballs to a dog was deemed the single worst thing done in a movie.
  • Summary: The film spends significant time in bathrooms, including Harrison Ford hitting his head on the sink, which was cited as a personal fear. The discussion briefly pivoted to Fatal Attraction, specifically recalling the scene where the husband feeds spaghetti meatballs to his dog after abandoning Glenn Close’s character.
High School Friend in Photo
Copied to clipboard!
(00:52:49)
  • Key Takeaway: A high school friend of one host, Scott Carino, appeared as the dead husband in a photograph, highlighting the era of physical photo albums as evidence.
  • Summary: Scott Carino, a high school friend who moved to LA to act, appeared in two photos as Michelle Pfeiffer’s deceased husband. This discovery was a major highlight for the host’s friend group in 2000, emphasizing the role of physical photo albums in that time period.
Harrison Ford’s Unrealistic Physique
Copied to clipboard!
(00:54:49)
  • Key Takeaway: Harrison Ford’s chiseled body at age 57, while allegedly due to sex and boating, was deemed unrealistically fit for a scientist living in rainy Vermont who supposedly ate poorly.
  • Summary: Harrison Ford’s body was deemed too ‘chiseled’ for his character, Dr. Norman Spencer, especially compared to the age of Richard Kimball (Ford’s character in The Fugitive). The hosts speculated his fitness came from constant infidelity (‘sex muscles’) and boating, rather than his alleged diet.
Homages to Hitchcock and Tarantino
Copied to clipboard!
(00:56:50)
  • Key Takeaway: The score by Alan Silvestri is a direct homage to Bernard Herrmann’s work for Hitchcock, while the film also contains homages to Rear Window and Tarantino (specifically regarding feet).
  • Summary: The film is rich with stealth homages, including the main plot echoing Rear Window and the ghost lookalike scenes referencing Vertigo. The score is noted as an homage to Bernard Herrmann, and a specific ‘feet’ reference was a secret nod to Quentin Tarantino.
Dennis Peck Relationship Test
Copied to clipboard!
(01:00:02)
  • Key Takeaway: The consensus was that Dennis Peck could easily seduce Claire Spencer due to her existing marital issues and his inherent charm, making the test easy for him.
  • Summary: The ‘Dennis Peck Relationship Test’ assessed if Peck could uproot the Spencer marriage in 15 minutes. The hosts agreed Peck would succeed quickly, noting Claire was already distracted by her husband’s infidelity and her own issues. Peck’s biggest challenge would be confronting Norman Spencer, not seducing Claire.
Jodi as Weakest Link
Copied to clipboard!
(01:01:46)
  • Key Takeaway: Jodi, the friend, is considered the film’s ‘Butch’s Girlfriend’ award winner for failing to immediately tell Claire she knew Norman was cheating for a year.
  • Summary: Jodi is criticized for not immediately revealing she knew Norman had been cheating for a year, which is seen as failing the ‘ride or die’ friendship test. Her excuse regarding the car accident was deemed insufficient, especially since she was already participating in séances at the house.
Norman’s Incompetent Murder Tactics
Copied to clipboard!
(01:09:13)
  • Key Takeaway: Norman Spencer is criticized as a sloppy murderer for repeating the method of drowning his mistress (Madison) when attempting to kill his wife (Claire).
  • Summary: It is insulting to Claire that Norman used the same drowning method on her as he used on his mistress, Madison. Furthermore, his use of a paralyzing agent with a questionable time frame and dumping evidence off the dock suggests he is not a smart killer.
Recasting Director City Ideas
Copied to clipboard!
(01:13:35)
  • Key Takeaway: Potential directors for a recast of What Lies Beneath included Brian De Palma, David Fincher, and Adrian Lyne, with Richard Gere suggested as a strong alternative lead for Norman Spencer.
  • Summary: Brian De Palma was suggested to lean into the erotic thriller aspects, potentially leading to Sharon Stone replacing Pfeiffer. David Fincher was proposed because Panic Room is similar in style, and Richard Gere was noted as a great potential replacement for Harrison Ford as Norman.
Dismal Research and Michelle Pfeiffer’s Fear
Copied to clipboard!
(01:15:08)
  • Key Takeaway: Despite making nearly $300 million, the film generated surprisingly little behind-the-scenes research, with the most notable fact being Michelle Pfeiffer’s fear of water requiring her to lie in a bathtub for hours.
  • Summary: The hosts found a surprisingly small amount of interesting production research for the successful film. Michelle Pfeiffer’s genuine fear of water meant she spent up to five hours at a time submerged in the bathtub set.
Claire’s Post-Haunting Status
Copied to clipboard!
(01:30:43)
  • Key Takeaway: Claire is deemed the number one movie character widow catch, as she retains the house and will be vindicated when the community realizes Norman drove her crazy, despite her major trust issues.
  • Summary: Claire is considered a top-tier widow catch because she keeps the house and will be publicly vindicated once Norman’s actions are known. However, her trust issues are rated extremely high (9.2 on a scale to Tiger Woods’ ex-wife), making future relationships difficult.
Ghost Haunting Timeline Questions
Copied to clipboard!
(01:32:26)
  • Key Takeaway: The timing of Madison’s haunting is questioned, specifically why it commenced a year after her death.
  • Summary: The participants questioned why Madison’s ghost waited one year before haunting Claire and Norman. They speculated this delay might be related to Caitlin, Norman’s daughter, needing to be absent before the haunting could fully manifest. The central role of the bathtub in the haunting mechanism was highlighted as a key element.
Bathtub’s Central Role in Haunting
Copied to clipboard!
(01:33:40)
  • Key Takeaway: The film’s supernatural elements would fail if the bathroom renovation eliminated the bathtub.
  • Summary: A major hypothetical question raised was how Madison’s ghost would operate if Norman had installed a stall shower instead of a bathtub during renovations. The tub is deemed central to her ability to manifest, fill the space, and show reflections. Norman is criticized for being a terrible murderer for not removing this key element.
Norman’s Murderer Failings
Copied to clipboard!
(01:34:27)
  • Key Takeaway: Norman is criticized for poor execution in both murder and covering up the crime.
  • Summary: Norman receives the ‘Coach Finstock, Mr. Miyagi award’ for worst life lesson due to his incompetence. His decision to dump the victim’s belongings, including the necklace, right in front of his dock is cited as absurdly poor planning. He possessed a boat, making the proximity of the disposal site inexcusable.
Rewatchables Memorabilia Choices
Copied to clipboard!
(01:35:13)
  • Key Takeaway: The boat and Harrison Ford’s boat outfit are preferred memorabilia over the ghost’s braid.
  • Summary: Participants listed desired memorabilia from What Lies Beneath, with one host choosing the Scott Carino photos and another selecting the boat or Harrison Ford’s outfit worn on the boat. The braid left by the ghost was explicitly rejected as unwanted memorabilia.
Sidney Sweeney’s New Project
Copied to clipboard!
(01:35:41)
  • Key Takeaway: Sidney Sweeney’s new project, ‘Housemade,’ has been greenlit.
  • Summary: The hosts noted that Sidney Sweeney’s new project, ‘Housemade’ (corrected from ‘Handmade’), has already been greenlit. They expressed strong negative opinions about the quality of ‘Housemade,’ calling it shockingly bad and terrible, despite its apparent success. This contrasts with the A-list quality of What Lies Beneath.
Double Feature Pairing Ideas
Copied to clipboard!
(01:36:42)
  • Key Takeaway: Double feature pairings centered on Harrison Ford’s ambiguous morality were suggested.
  • Summary: Suggestions for double features included pairing What Lies Beneath with The Mosquito Coast if Ford is the bad guy, or with The Fugitive or Presumed Innocent to explore ambiguity about his guilt. The hosts decided against a ‘Who Lost the Movie’ category as being too negative.
Who Won and Lost Movie
Copied to clipboard!
(01:37:40)
  • Key Takeaway: Michelle Pfeiffer is declared the winner of the movie, while Zemeckis is suggested as a potential loser.
  • Summary: Michelle Pfeiffer was definitively named as the person who ‘won’ the movie. Robert Zemeckis was tentatively suggested as someone who ’lost’ the movie, despite its $300 million gross, because he followed it up with Cast Away. The ending of the film, specifically the reanimation and physical dragging by the ghost, was cited as dropping the film’s rating from an eight to a seven.
Discomfort with Evil Favorite Actors
Copied to clipboard!
(01:38:28)
  • Key Takeaway: Viewers experience significant discomfort when beloved actors portray villains.
  • Summary: The hosts expressed a strong aversion to seeing Harrison Ford play an evil character, noting it weaponizes audience expectations built from roles like Deckard or Han Solo. This feeling was extended to other actors, citing Tom Cruise in Interview with the Vampire and Colin Farrell in The Penguin as examples of roles that cause viewer distress. The desire is for favorite actors to remain in roles that align with their established personas.
Modern A-List B-Movie Rarity
Copied to clipboard!
(01:39:45)
  • Key Takeaway: The B-movie starring two A-listers, like What Lies Beneath, is becoming rare in modern cinema.
  • Summary: The structure of What Lies Beneath—a B-movie featuring two A-listers (Ford and Pfeiffer)—is noted as increasingly uncommon today. A modern remake would likely star actors like Matt Damon and Anne Hathaway, but would either be a massive blockbuster or a small, dark A24 indie film. The current trend avoids mid-budget genre films with top-tier stars.
Ravens Playoff Coaching Criticism
Copied to clipboard!
(01:40:47)
  • Key Takeaway: The Ravens’ coaching decision to move the ball backward for a field goal attempt is deemed absurd.
  • Summary: The conversation briefly pivoted to criticizing John Harbaugh’s decision to move the ball backward to set up a kick, which was called absurd, especially in a difficult environment like Pittsburgh. This decision is linked to Harbaugh’s eventual firing, suggesting a need for fresh ideas. The hosts referenced the ‘ghost of Billy Cundiff’ in relation to poor kicking situations.