Linbeymusol
Wonderful character development!
Senteur
As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.
Cooktopi
The acting in this movie is really good.
Bob
This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
zvonnydamne
After watching this movie the only thing i could think of is Madonna's ass. Why not? All this confusing story about old men having arrhythmia and women who can manipulate their desease into death is nothing compared to Madonna's ass.Ass is a hero and an object of attention in this movie. Of course, Madonna got for her full art gallery, but i ask - isn't her ass is art? And i never seen Madonna in her gallery, only in court. This movie have a court of law apparently. But who cares.Willem Dafoe playing a lawyer who got sense of admiration for Madonna (more like for her ass) and trying to save her from electric chair. I bet chair got jealous for Dafoe playing with Madonna's ass, but it's not a point. Point is - forget the story. It's stupid. It's laughable. It's unbelieveable. But be sure to check Madonna's ass. It's got a very good quality.
itamarscomix
Those three words seem to run through most of the reviews for this title, yet still it maintains its very low 4.1 average rating. It's probably one of the best of the exploitative, sleazy erotic thrillers of the 90's. That's not high praise, but it also places it quite far away from the worst films ever made.The weakest link in the film - and maybe the one responsible for much of its bad reputation is Madonna. Having tried her might at several mediocre comedies, Madonna chose this thriller as her first serious role, and she doesn't quite make it. Her acting isn't quite horrible - but she's clearly trying to channel the femme fatales of the classic Film Noirs, and placing herself in the same category as the likes of Barbara Stanwyck, Marlene Dietrich and Kim Novak, she's nowhere near good enough. It's also not as good as her previous femme fatale role on Dick Tracy, which was just self-aware and campy enough to work. But Body of Evidence takes itself too seriously for Madonna's performance to pass. Surprisingly, she isn't even good enough at being sensual and seductive, making the sexual scenes quite awkward (as lovely as it is to see so much of Madonna's skin, that is).But surprisingly, most of the other scenes work quite well. Willem Dafoe and Joe Mantegna are good enough as the rival lawyers to make the courtroom scenes very effective, and as a courtroom drama alone (paying as little mind as possible to Madonna's scenes) it's well written, well acted and quite entertaining. Julianne Moore is good in her few short scenes as Dafoe's wife, and much of the supporting cast is also solid. All of these make it an entertaining enough thriller, filled to the brim with clichés but still managing to hold a little punch at the end. It's by no means a great film but it's also not that bad.
Mike Hardy
In this raunchy thriller, Madonna is suspected of murdering her elderly partner using her sexy body (lucky guy). After she is accused of such a "crime" the lawyer she chooses to represent her is Willem defoe.OK, so it is not the most plausible plot line but this movie can still be enjoyed, not least for Madonnas hot body in numerous steamy scenes which although often criticised I found to be very well done and quite erotic. It is true that Madonna and her body are the main reason to watch this thriller but there are some decent genuine performances by defoe and mantegna battling it out in the court room and Anne Archer as the deceased' embittered ex. Julianne Moore is also in there in a small role as Franks (defoes) wife.Bottom line! if you like 80/90s sex films then this is a definitely worth watching. Also make sure to get the unrated version as there is a lot more to see in there.
smatysia
Certainly not a great film, but not as bad as it has been made out to be. Madonna's acting is OK, and I suspect the "woodenness" of her performance was largely what the director wanted. Her character's passion was limited to the bedroom (and elevator, and stairs, and parking garage, etc.) and never extended to her daily life. And, by the way, I had forgotten how pretty she could be back then. Anne Archer looked awfully good as well, even while being weepy and not completely hinged. The rest of the cast put in good work, with a special commendation for Julianne Moore. Frank Langella was suitably creepy, and Joe Mantegna suitably industrious. Some of the dialog didn't completely work, but if you watch this without preconceptions, you'll find it OK.
