STARRING: Michelle Pfeiffer, Harrison Ford, Amber Valletta and Joe Morton

I was freakin’ scared, man!

"What Lies Beneath," the new thriller from director Robert Zemeckis ("Forrest Gump") and stars Michelle Pfeiffer ("The Story of Us") and Harrison Ford ("Air Force One"), scared the pants off me. This story of a lonely wife being stalked by a supernatural force is classic moviemaking with a new millennium spin. Zemeckis uses all the latest tricks of his trade to make a movie that’ll have you checking under your bed when you get home.

I’m the first to admit that I’m an easy mark when it comes to scary flicks. As a kid, "Scooby Doo" would creep me out. I didn’t see "Nightmare on Elm Street" until my late twenties and I only recently saw the original "Halloween." Much to my girlfriend’s chagrin, I have never experienced "The Exorcist." Don’t let my girly-man status regarding chillers make you underestimate this film. It’s a nail-biter from beginning to end.

This movie rejuvenates the careers of both Ford and Pfeiffer. While I like both stars, they’ve been flying on autopilot for their last several films. Ford’s been wearing the same grimace of slow-burn self-righteousness since "Patriot Games" and Pfeiffer’s been playing a harried mom in way too many movies to count. "What Lies Beneath" has jolted them both out of their respective doldrums. Ford and Pfeiffer haven’t been this good in years.

Ford hasn't been this good in years. There's a gleam in his eye that's been missing for far too long.

Zemeckis has to take the credit for re-energizing his stars. He’s got a great track record for making crowd-pleasing films. With the exception of the awful "Death Becomes Her," he can be counted on to hit the bullseye time and again. I first noticed this director’s talent in 1985 when he rescued me from a summer of mediocre movies with the first "Back to the Future."

I had started to lose hope in Hollywood after suffering through the saccharine "Cocoon" and the distasteful "A View to a Kill" (the image of Grace Jones mounting Roger Moore still haunts my dreams). Then Marty McFly and Doc Brown restored my faith in mainstream cinema. Zemeckis does it again this summer with "What Lies Beneath."

While we’ve had some good movies this season, we’ve had few great ones. For the most part, it’s been pretty slim pickings. When I look back on the summer of 2000, there’s not much that’s going to stick out in my mind. And there aren’t too many movies on the horizon to compensate for this year’s middling crop. Paul Verhoeven’s new invisible man flick looks good, but then so did "Starship Troopers." The guy’s just not a reliable source of entertainment. "Coyote Ugly" looks like a 90-minute beer commercial and "The Replacements" resembles a remake of that Scott Bakula football movie. Who needs that?

For my money, "What Lies Beneath" is the best film of the summer. Zemeckis has produced a taut thriller with two fabulous stars performing at the top of their game. It’s just plain fun to watch.

And it’s pretty damn scary, too!

Pfeiffer plays Claire, who’s stuck alone in her big, lonely Vermont home after sending her only daughter off to college. Her scientist hubby, Norman (Ford), spends all his time at the lab on some type of research that’s going to make him famous. Now only in the movies would a guy pick test tubes over Michelle Pfeiffer. Of course, this is a movie where Harrison Ford plays a scientist. I’ve met a few lab jockeys in my day and while many could have passed for Gerald Ford, I’ve never once confused one with Indiana Jones. But I digress . . .

This movie makes watching Michelle Pfeiffer fun again.

Strange things start happening around the house. Doors open by themselves, pictures fall over and someone keeps filling the bathtub with water. Claire is naturally getting wierded out by all this freakiness, but can’t get anyone to take her seriously. Her husband’s blaming it all on "empty nest syndrome" since she’s separated for the first time from her beloved offspring. Plus, Claire’s been a little "fragile" since a mysterious car accident a year earlier.

Okay Norman, I’ll buy that. But how do you explain the computer typing all by itself and the bizarre reflection in the bath water? Hmmmmmm?

A good movie — especially a thriller — consists of several little details that all come together for a big pay-off at the end. Remember the charge you got out of the conclusion of "The Sixth Sense"? It’s the same for this flick. Even things you might discard as trivial come back to play a vital role later in the story. Zemeckis and writer Clark Gregg lead us exactly where they want us to go and the destination is a riveting climax.

An exceptional script and masterful direction aren’t much good without talented stars. Both Ford and Pfeiffer take a departure from their usual roles in this film. Taking this risk has electrified both their performances. For me, Ford was fast-becoming the cinematic equivalent of Abraham Lincoln: noble, respected and very stiff. His work here is a great surprise. There’s a gleam in his eye that’s been missing for far too long. I hope Ford stays on this path because it could lead to an exciting new chapter in his career.

I’ve had a crush on Michelle Pfeiffer ever since she straddled that ladder during the "Cool Rider" number in "Grease 2." She’s been my personification of movie star beauty for over half my life. I even saw "Up Close and Personal" twice so you know I’ve got it bad. Pfeiffer’s best in roles that combine her acting prowess with her sex appeal, like in "The Fabulous Baker Boys" or "Batman Returns." The last several years, however, she’s been toiling in dowdy turns as frazzled moms.

Maybe she felt a kinship with these characters since she’d recently become a mom herself. Or maybe she wanted to walk away from sexy parts in order to be "taken seriously" as an actress. In my opinion, Pfeiffer’s always been highly regarded for her acting — she’s just also happens to be a major babe. Whatever her motivation, these movies did not capitalize on her strengths. After her clenched performance as a bitter wife in "Story of Us," I was ready to look for a new obsession.

You won't remember the last time you had such a blast being scared. I'm still afraid to take a bath.

"What Lies Beneath" has revitalized Pfeiffer. If she was sleepwalking through those other roles, she’s wide-awake now. Pfeiffer approaches her part with a newfound gusto and gives the character many layers. In the beginning, Claire is sad and lonely as she adjusts to life without her daughter. As things get creepier, her delicate psyche starts to crumble. Then as she begins to unravel the mystery, Pfeiffer imbues the character with a hidden strength. She also inhabits this part with a humor and sexuality that’s been absent from much of her recent work. This movie makes watching Michelle Pfeiffer fun again.

Zemeckis gets points for taking two old pros in a new direction. Ford and Pfeiffer have great chemistry and it’s wonderful to see two huge stars together in the same film. Nowadays if a movie’s got a hot male lead, he’s paired with a lesser-known actress or vice versa. Maybe most flicks just can’t afford two A-list talents, who knows? It seems, however, that star-filled extravaganzas are few and far between. We still get "event" movies, but they eschew big names for explosions and hype. Any movie stars in "The Patriot" besides Mel Gibson?

"What Lies Beneath" is Hollywood at it’s best. It’s an exceptional film. You won’t remember the last time you had such a blast being scared. I saw this movie with a group of friends and some of us are still afraid to take a bath (Sorry, Kathy! We’ll see a nice romantic comedy next time, I promise). The film uses some very subtle — but eye-popping — special effects to juice up a classic ghost story.

This discriminating use of computer wizardry really sets the flick apart from its contemporaries. While other movies rely on the latest fakery to goose audiences, "What Lies Beneath" proves that a talented cast, a tight script and a gifted director are all the special effects you’ll ever need.