I am writing this the day after I watched this and have had time to reflect and consider my opinion on it. Indeed I enjoyed the acting and the way the story was told throughout the whole movie with an expectation that, despite the length of the film, there would be a final resolution at the very end when we truly discover what actually took place on that fateful day. Sadly first, that resolution was not provided and I was just left hanging after 150 minutes.
Secondly, on top of that, after some reflection of what I had watched, one plot hole was jarring at my equilibrium, and that was the fact that there was no definitive understanding of how the husband had received his head injury. I mean seriously? The defence hypothesis just made no sense. If he had genuinely received that amount of head trauma, which you get to see by the way during the autopsy, by hitting his head on the way down then without any shadow of a doubt the force created to produce that kind of trauma would have reflected back on the object doing it and there would been signs of that impact somewhere on the wooden balcony or rail that his head impacted. It's all wood, for god's sake. And considering pretty much 2 thirds of the story surrounds the court case and did she, or didn't she, then this detracts from the whole premise of the movie. It's unfortunate that such an obvious omission to provide an adequate counter argument, and that the audience is just expected to accept it on face value that this would work in a real life criminal case just takes us all for fools.
So loved the way the story was told, just it didn't pass the bar when it comes to believability. Hence the rating.
Secondly, on top of that, after some reflection of what I had watched, one plot hole was jarring at my equilibrium, and that was the fact that there was no definitive understanding of how the husband had received his head injury. I mean seriously? The defence hypothesis just made no sense. If he had genuinely received that amount of head trauma, which you get to see by the way during the autopsy, by hitting his head on the way down then without any shadow of a doubt the force created to produce that kind of trauma would have reflected back on the object doing it and there would been signs of that impact somewhere on the wooden balcony or rail that his head impacted. It's all wood, for god's sake. And considering pretty much 2 thirds of the story surrounds the court case and did she, or didn't she, then this detracts from the whole premise of the movie. It's unfortunate that such an obvious omission to provide an adequate counter argument, and that the audience is just expected to accept it on face value that this would work in a real life criminal case just takes us all for fools.
So loved the way the story was told, just it didn't pass the bar when it comes to believability. Hence the rating.
Tell Your Friends