Note: This review contains more than just "a spoiler". So if you haven't seen the play, don't read on. This was a good effort at a thriller, but many basic flaws prevent my giving it more than 6/10. The first 40 minutes were quite boring, and I only persevered because the guide in the TV Guide gave it a really wonderful review. So I stuck with it and overall it wasn't too bad. But that beginning really needs cutting down to about half. There were some areas that I really did have trouble with. Have you ever seen a film in which somebody lends somebody else a raincoat and the recipient doesn't immediately get targeted for murder? This is so old and worn an idea that a real author would shun it. And it seems to be part of the general movie scenes that it doesn't really matter who gets killed or injured in a movie provided it isn't the hero or heroine. And since when did women carry all their personal belongings in their coat pockets rather than in a handbag? And surely if someone is going to lend someone else a raincoat, then the pockets would be emptied first. The ex-policeman can't have been so stupid that having blackmailed a murderer, he just sits in a chair waiting for the man to leave the room to get a weapon with which to kill him. And what was with the final scene? Were we supposed to get an inkling of more terror to come (in a sequel perhaps) when we see Kate with her son on the beach? Or was it just to show that you can use the same actor as father and son in the same play?
Review of The Best Man
