WasAnnon
Slow pace in the most part of the movie.
BallWubba
Wow! What a bizarre film! Unfortunately the few funny moments there were were quite overshadowed by it's completely weird and random vibe throughout.
Aiden Melton
The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
sallymackintosh
Sat and watched this today and have lost an hour and a half of life that we will never get back. The write up was intriguing and Angelina Jolie usually is not associated with rubbish so we watched it. As a true story you would have expected an ending - not in this film, it just stops! The story is really slow and disjointed and never really gets going with anything of any consequence. All expectations of uncovering a conspiracy and identifying the murderer are never founded because the film literally just stops. It was almost as if they got as bored as the audience and gave up. Some of the acting is okay but that is all that can be said really. The sound quality was appalling too. An absolute load of rubbish.
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.
goertzen-3
I love movies- I'd watch a movie every day if I had time. There are very few movies I don't watch to the bitter end- even if it's obvious they're duds. But this dud takes the cake. I was watching it with my little brother and after he had drifted off to sleep for the third time I figured this was enough. (Unfortunately I stayed awake the whole time!) So I quit watching. Out of curiosity I checked how much time was left in the movie. Eight minutes. I could not have cared less how it ended. Boring. Boring. Boring. Lots of footage of the "hero" driving a car. Unexplained plot gaps. Very poor level acting. I think it was re-released now because Angela Jolie was in it and she's hot in Hollywood right now. (The movie came out in 1995.) We got it from the new release section in the movie store, and what a rip-off. -This is easily the most boring movie I've ever seen
