Fracture (2007)

Beautiful, moving film.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Fracture is one of those movies that you see once and feel cheated. There's something all too contrived, too farfetched, and too convoluted about the proceedings - pun intended - so much so that you can almost see the cast suffocating under the sheer weight of it all. Countless other movies have done more with less.

Only to watch it again a few years later and think, "what a load of nonsense!!" This is definitely one of those films. I'm almost starting to feel a bit sorry for Rosamund Pike cos I seem to be making a habit of giving low scores to films she's in. But then perhaps she likes being in films with plots that rely on seriously bad police work. And a bad apple that thinks they're way too clever. Did anyone else wonder exactly which accent Anthony Hopkins was meant to be using? Cos there was definitely some Scottish and Irish thrown in with the Welsh along the way. That was very distracting.Anyway, first time I saw it I thought it was a rather well put together stylish thriller. Second time around it just appears to be a complete slating on the inadequacies of a legal and justice system.Then again, perhaps I'll watch it again another day and the cops falling for the cons "cons" might all make sense. But somehow I doubt that very much. A clever thriller should really have at least one really sharp criminal. Not one that's so clever he gets away with it first time only to give the cops all the evidence they need to put him away for a bigger crime later on. And, ideally, cops who can figure out if the murder weapon isn't at the crime scene then they need to eliminate possibilities and do some proper detecting work. And a guy who works his way up to lieutenant has a) no idea on the identity of the woman he's having an affair with and b) manages to get his gun swapped twice in the same day?With some films, the deeper you look, the bigger the fractures. I think I've probably just talked myself out of giving it a third viewing.

Finally a courtroom drama-psychological thriller with some substance. Hopkins is Ted Crawford, a malevolent, clever guy who prefers homicide to divorce. Gosling is Willy Beachum, a smug young lawyer on his way to a bright career in the private sector who ends up playing a cat and mouse game he could do without.Crawford shots his wife Jennifer, because she has an affair with Lt. Nunally, and Homicide cop and then sets a crazy plan in motion. Jennifer ends up in a coma and the distraught Nunally sort of looses it.I am not a Gosling fan, but contrary to most other reviewers I found his character strangely endearing. Maybe because of his integrity, a quality so rarely seen in modern day movies' characters. Willy' s smugness is mitigated by his determinationWilly sees Jennifer as a victim, not as somebody who "had it coming" and visits her at the hospital, hoping for a miracle recovery.What I found disturbing are the comments about Crawford deserving to get away with murder because he is clever. Some people must still have a hard on for Hannibal Lecter or think that a woman deserves to die if she is unfaithful - which is worrying.There are a few plot holes, the biggest being the affair between Jennifer and Nunally. In fact, the whole movie stands on the premise that Nunally is blissfully ignorant about Jennifer's identity. I found it weird that a Homicide cop did not try to find out who is lover was. It is very unlikely cop behavior, since she could have been linked to terrorism or crime and cops like to investigate.Anyway, the pace is fast but not frantic, with some luscious settings that do not hurt the eye and witty dialogues. My favorite quote:"Maybe I can find some new evidence by tomorrow" "Where? Are you going to buy it at the evidence store?"

You don't have to be a criminal defense lawyer to conclude that this movie was totally ridiculous. Just look at one item--We're supposed to believe that the rich guy is some kind of special genius. But look what he did. He risked a 30 year prison sentence on his assumption that when the police came to his house after he killed his wife that the only hostage negotiator that might come to his door was the guy who had been screwing his wife. What if Joe Blow showed up instead? This is L.A., likely with up to ten other guys who might have handled negotiations. Did the rich guy skip considering that the cop he wanted might have been working another case? LOL. He would have been unable to switch the guns as this movie showed because Joe Blow might not own a Glock. Does a "genius" take "all in" risks like that? No.There is not much point in going over the many other nonsense things about this movie. I just thought I'd mention the above.