TheLittleSongbird
Without Evidence had a really good, complicated idea of a conspiracy thriller, and I was expecting it to be tense and exciting. But I will say I was disappointed. It isn't the worst movie ever, but as a conspiracy thriller it does fail big time. One redeeming quality was the acting. Scott Plank is fairly good as the brother of the murder victim, and although she is (disappointingly) only in three scenes, Angelina Jolie also impresses. However, they are let down by plodding direction, unconvincing supporting actors and a lacklustre script. Another problem was that the characters and the plot were badly underdeveloped, they tried to get somewhere but because of the script, it never got across. The most disappointing aspect was the ending, the final solution is usually the most riveting thing in a film, but the film completely lacked that.Yes, someone gets convicted of the murder, but we never do find out if they're guilty, or if there's even a conspiracy. Honestly in that case, it needs a sequel, if it ends that abruptly. In conclusion, a disappointing and confusing film (I can't remember the amount of times I was going WHAT? at the screen), that had so much promise, but just failed to deliver. 4/10 Bethany Cox.
Jack OntheNet
*** possible spoilers ***I come across this film today and I like it very much. The film is very solid, very logical, very real, presented no evidence but every clue pointing to the suspected mastermind behind the murder -- the "suit", a state officer in the Correction System, came from some other state, got trouble in some sex deal which was in the newspapers.Quite naturally they could not put the name in the film but that's enough information to inspire me to Google up a little more. I simply started with "Michael Francke murder" and the first match popped up answered it all and revealed, to my surprise, the case is having fresh new breakthroughs.The Willamette Week news story dated Nov. 17, 2004 says, "Now the old case is heating up thanks to a document that never surfaced in the trial of Francke's murderer or his subsequent appeal. It was discovered not by a zealous defense lawyer but by the dead man's brother, who found it last month in an old box of evidence..." Anybody interested can just search it and read more details. It's very interesting to read and tallies with different clues in this film, or even not-the-clues in this film.This is an amazing story because it's real. It's no Hollywood. It's no hamburger. It's no Tom Cruise or Sylvester Stallone fighting a two-hour quick shot. It takes fifteen and probably even more years of a man's life to fight against not only a single bad apple but a bad apple tree. Not for himself, but for his brother.I like this film and I expect the sequel, both for the case and this film.
redhottcrystal
This movie said it was based on a true story so I thought it might be interesting. From the start the movie was disappointing.Little information is built upon the characters leaving you not knowing enough about any of them for them to be very likable. Just when the movie seems to be going in the right direction it falls short. Situations develop but with little detail. There seemed to be too much information trying to be crammed into the movie.It was like one scene he asked for the autopsy report and ,cut, next scene he gets the report in the mail.Toward the end of the movie I just kept wondering when is the movie going to be over. Then the ending is there and you don't even know it because the whole movie just drags on. It ends so abruptly that you still have questions, but really you could care less if they are answered.A total waste of time and money.
AgDoctor
For independent cinema viewers, here is a super-realistic film touted as a true story. This production contains no special effects or actors who were famous at this time. One actress, Angeline Jolie as Jodie, became famous after this film and has starred in roles including Laura Croft, Tomb Raider. Despite the small budget, this film sports a down-to-earth plot with plenty of detailed twists.Without special effects, this artistic film is suited mainly for the minority-viewing public that enjoys a complicated murder mystery without intervention from the supernatural or Hollywood's frequent sequence of improbable events. Prosecuting attorneys, and fans of murder trials, should see this film.
AD
