I can't believe I watched the whole thing. For fans of any kind of thriller or suspense films, or any kind of drama, you are going to be seriously disappointed with this one. We have all seen the "trusted assistant is nutty stalker" movie a hundred times, so we expect something different when a new version is foisted on us. Every single second of this movie was predictable, from the start to the finish. There is not one surprise. Based on other comments here I stuck it out to the end, but oh did I regret it. We've seen it all before. And on top of that, the dialog was just horrible. Nobody speaks that way, no, not even to themselves. I will remark that Chris Potter was one of the few good things about this movie. He is actually an actor with talent. I really don't know what his agent was thinking when they got him mixed up in this mess. He needs to fire that person ASAP.

THE PERFECT ASSISTANT (TV Movie 2008) 4 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 2:75 min

BASIC PLOT: Rachel Partson (Josie Davis) loves her boss David Wescott (Chris Potter) just a little too much. She's been his executive assistant for three years, and now she's ready to be something else, his wife. The only trouble is, David's a recent widower, and not interested. Rachel's not going to let that stop her. She won't let anything, or anybody stand in the way of her "perfect" relationship. Can David realize the depth of Rachel's obsession, in time to save himself, and his daughter Isabelle (Veronique-Natale Szalankiewicz)?

WHAT WORKS: *EXCELLENT MELODRAMA This is exactly how a well laid out melodrama should work. Not a lot of character development, but lots of good vs evil action.

*REALISTIC PORTRAYAL OF EROTOMANIA Rachel Partson (Josie Davis) has erotomania, and it's depicted well by both the actress, and the writers, Christine Conradt and Shawn Riopelle.

*MANIPULATIONS AREN'T TOO OVER THE TOP In a lot of these types of melodramas, the actions are so over the top, they are not believable. But here, for the most part, Rachel's actions are inline with someone who has a severe romantic fixation.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK:

*DAVID LEADS RACHEL ON And then acts surprised when she reciprocates. I get they are "celebrating" landing a big business deal, BUT... You are sharing a fancy hotel room with your executive assistant, your daughter's in bed, and now you suggest drinking champagne with her. You go on and on about how she's been there for you, and how you don't know what you'd do without her, you're toasting champagne, and looking into her eyes, most people would take that as a come on.

*DAVID RELATES TO RACHEL, AS IF SHE'S UNATTRACTIVE In reality, Rachel (Josie Davis) is the most attractive woman in the whole movie. I don't say this to be unkind, but she's more attractive than Carol Wescott (Jennifer Marcil), David's late wife, and more attractive than Judith Manion (Rachel Hunter), his business partner. Josie Davis is a knockout, and not the type of woman most men would ignore. David's reactions to her are as if she's a plain jane 2, not a drop dead gorgeous 8, so that part of the story really doesn't work.

*WALLY, A BUSINESS ASSOCIATE, TRACKS HIS BOSS'S NANNY'S HOURS? That would be Rachel's job, as David's executive assistant, not Wally's (Jason Harper), one of David's business associates. THAT PLOTLINE MAKES NO SENSE! I expect better from Christine Conradt and Shawn Riopelle, the writers. Also, this plot device is a deus ex machina, because this is how Judith and Wally discover the nanny's immigration appointment was bogus (Rachel set up the fake appointment for the nanny, so the nanny would be busy, and she could go in her stead, with David and his daughter on a trip). From a simple appointment time mix-up, Wally and Judith "figure out" Rachel did all this behind the scenes. WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP! Wally, would not be handling anything to do with his boss's nanny, and even if he did, he would assume it was just a bureaucratic mix-up, NOT a grand conspiracy. Rachel hasn't given anyone a reason to suspect her thus far, so this whole story line is GARBAGE! Top executives don't sit around gossiping, or even thinking about nanny's and assistants. It throws the viewer out of their suspension of disbelief, and instead makes them throw things at the TV!

Thanks Christine Conradt and Shawn Riopelle for RUINING what was a decent melodrama in the last twenty minutes!

TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *I'd definitely recommend this to fans of Josie Davis. If you like watching her portray a villainess, then pop that corn, and turn off the logical side of your brain for an hour and a half. IF you like, and understand the art form of melodrama, then you'll probably like this. Keep in mind, the last twenty minutes SUCKS, and MAKES NO SENSE, but if that type of thing doesn't bother you, then watch away! It is low budget, so keep that in mind. If you're a person who likes deep character development, and believable actions from the players, I'd look elsewhere (I'd also stop watching TV movies).

CLOSING NOTES: *This is a made-for-tv movie, please keep that in mind before you watch\rate it. TV movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.

*I have no connection to the film, or production in ANY way. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.