Perfect Murder, Perfect Town: JonBenét and the City of Boulder

I have read the book, "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" which is excellent; the movie, however, is terrible. The movie begins with the morning of the kidnapping, which is the first mistake. The audience is never given a chance to know JonBenet thus, when she is found murdered, we feel nothing for it. We don't know the victim, not to mention the body in the film is beyond fake. Look closely and you will see it rocking back and forth briefly after it has been touched by a mourner.

Secondly, all the pivital information is thrown in the viewer's face all at once. People who have not read the book or followed the case will be confused. Within 3 minutes, 7 characters are introduced, either in person or by mention of their name.

Thirdly, like the lack of characterization of JonBenet, we know nothing of the family. All that we know is what we are told which is the number one mistake of story-telling...telling and not showing.

What makes the movie so bad is the fact that it could have been so good. What is so odd, is that 7 years ago, when I was a freshman in high school, I wrote a script based on the crime (I am a film major) and oddly enough, i truly believe that my version was MUCH more emotionally charged, as it should be, after all, a 6 year old girl was murdered. And ironically enough, many of the scenes that are in this film , were actually in my script. My point: this movie seems like a 14 year old wrote it.

Read the book, don't watch the movie.

This movie was very well done. I enjoy watching it. The little girl who plays JonBenet is a splitting image of the real JonBenet. Both the actors who played the parents look very much like the real thing. Even though in the pictures that the parents look through are obviously not JonBenet, if you didn't know better, you would think it was really her. And the dummy that was in the casket was very life-like. As you watch this, you start to get a hint on whodunnit. It was very well-acted. Does anyone know if the real house was used in the film?? It look so much like the real 755 15th Street. I love the line "I need an ambulance, I need back-up. I have a dead little girl." And the music played when the dad finds her is quite eerie making it even more shivery than it already is. It's a great movie, especially one when you are in the crime-solving mood.

There's been a brutal killing in Boulder, Colorado: JonBenét Ramsey, a 6-year-old girl from an affluent family, has been found murdered on Christmas Day in 1996, her body discovered in the basement of her parents' maze-like house some eight hours after they first reported her missing. Thus begins a chain of events that leads to lies, deception, bruised egos, terminated careers, fallen reputations, lawsuits, and so much ill will and bad blood that Boulder is probably still reeling from the aftershocks of this case. Excellent docudrama, a four-hour CBS movie-for-television chronicling the baffling true-life murder investigation, makes its case right from the start: that it is irrelevant how much time has transpired since the actual crime occurred (irrelevant, also, how many years have passed since this movie originally aired in 2000). This is a case that deserves to be solved, and it's an honest-to-God puzzler no matter how many news programs have attempted to cover the territory. Directing with enormous skill and a keen-eyed sensibility, Lawrence Schiller, working from Tom Topor's adaptation of Schiller's own book, gives us an awful lot of material to sift through, and yet he makes the picture a compulsively-watchable yarn featuring dozens of complicated characters introduced with clarity and aplomb. It would be next to impossible to eliminate scenes or conversations without leaving unanswered questions behind, so the running time is justified; still, I did grow tired of a subplot involving a "bottom feeder" reporter from a tabloid journal, while Kris Kristofferson's homicide detective Lou Smit never quite comes to life (Smit stood steadfastly behind the child's accused parents, and had a nifty summation of events which he proclaimed in a private session, yet much of the time we don't know where Smit stands with some of the evidence gathered--or why he seemed to believe the parents' story from the get-go). The film is frustrating: it's well-informed and yet cloudy. Since the case remains unsolved, there's not much satisfaction in the finale (we as viewers want an emotional release and, of course, we don't get it). Nevertheless, the filmmakers provide some great food-for-thought here and the large cast is superb, particularly Ken Howard as District Attorney Alex Hunter (who waged a war of words and actions with the Colorado Police Dept.) and Marg Helgenberger as the child's erratic mother. The wealthy parents, who stonewalled the police for four months and seemed to lead everyone in charge around by the hand, are two of the most fascinating murder witnesses in criminal history, and this is most likely the best examination of them we'll ever get on film.

i agree with previous comments that there were too many characters in part #1. i reported on the investigation and although i knew nearly all the players, i had trouble keeping them straight while watching. i can tell you, that at least in part #1, the portrayals of the ramseys, commander eller, det. steve thomas and d.a. alex hunter were right on. so far, the tv movie is pretty even-handed.

True crime docu-dramas are interesting because they allow you to get some insight into certain social conditions in a certain part of the world. Seen from that angle, this movie offers quite a lot. The viewers get to know the beautiful scenery of the town of Boulder, Colorado, a place most of us may like to live in. In the movie, it serves as the almost constantly perceptible background to a very sad story, the murder of a little girl. There is no happy ending. The person who committed this atrocious crime is not apprehended and very likely never will be. The movie does not participate in the guessing game. Instead it tries to document the tribulations of a community not used to the widespread attention the crime is given and the ensuing pressure from the media.

What makes this story and the movie interesting is the feeling it conveys that there seem to be serious cultural differences within the USA (which I think is little known in my part of the world). The parents of the murdered girl had moved to Boulder from the Southeast not too long before the tragedy. They brought with them a lifestyle which to the people of Boulder might have seemed unusual and strange, and this seems to have furthered suspicions against them. The parents in their turn did not seem to trust their surroundings anymore once the tragedy happened and tried to get back East „into safety" immediately. One can only guess how many misunderstandings this general mistrust might have caused and how this prevented the crime from being solved.

The acting is very good, all characters are convincing, especially Deirdre Lovejoy as the young detective who is brutally left to her own devices in a very difficult and complicated situation and Sean Whalen as tabloid journalist Jeff Shapiro, a character who seems to be the screen writer's pet and offers some comic relief. The only thing that disturbed me is the title. Perfect Murder? I mean, I can understand the slightly ironic meaning of Perfect Town, but perfect murder, this indicates a criminal act someone profited from without getting punished. Who on earth should profit from the murder of a little girl?