Faux coupable

Going by the title 'Eyewitness' when I saw the movie (which isn't as ungainly as the alternative 'Trapped by my Father's Killer'), is this sometimes suspenseful though frequently predictable Canuck crime-thriller concerning an escaped prisoner seeking revenge for his supposed wrongful incarceration on a double murder rap. Unfortunately most sleuths will find the answer to the mystery is telegraphed too boldly in one particular scene, but it's still somewhat fun getting there, even if the eventual climax becomes a little repetitive.

The central characters played by Booth and Olejnik are a bit uneven but that seems to be more a functional fault of the plot which is too contrived and simplistic, the turning point in the story attributable to a fairly significant oversight which defies logic. Similarly weak is the time pressure Olejnik's character is under to solve the mystery before his daughter is adopted, but it at least gives Booth's character a reason to feel some sympathy for his plight.

Technically it's fine for a telemovie (Canadian, shot on location) although some of the supporting performances are a little stilted and there's unnecessary padding used to beef up the runtime in the absence of a more elaborate plot. Occasionally tense yet very predictable desktop mystery might leave you feeling a little short changed with the all too neatly wrapped conclusion, and so overall it's an average TV movie time filler.

Diana Ratlidge (Lindy Booth) is haunted by the murder of her wealthy businessman father Max Ratlidge and her fiancé Brian Turner. She lives alone in the family mansion. Her testimony convicted the groundskeeper Louis Allen (Craig Olejnik). He escapes from prison and takes her captive. He maintains his innocence.

It's a simple premise but even simple premises need execution. It's highly unlikely that Louis escaped 100 miles away and still be wearing his orange prison jumpsuit. It becomes a two person play for the most part but the story lacks the subtle writing needed. At its most basic, the audience needs to question his guilt or innocence. Without any mystery, the story flatlines. It lacks the tension that the movie so sorely needs. There should be less evidence. At least, the video should be less clear. We need to question whether Louis is trying to gaslight Diana. Also if they can't write cops right, they should leave them out of it. It would be better if they're absent. This should be Hitchcockian but the filmmaking is nowhere near that level.

Caught this on Lifetime the other night and wish I hadn't. The acting was horrible. Story was a credible whodunit, though. Diana, a wealthy socialite, loses both her father and fiance to a murder by a man, Louis, who worked for the family that she testifies killed them both. But did he, really? Louis escapes from prison to prove his innocence and pays her a visit holding Diana captive in her own home. Will Diana learn the truth about who the real murderer is and will Louis clear his name? You will have to tune in but the movie loses momentum in the middle and I really lost interest by the end and didn't care. Would not watch again!

I enjoyed the movie very much. The suspense and the build up of action right to the end was very engaging where you couldn't stop watching. Not the most complicated of plot lines - but entertaining nevertheless.

Yet another boring lifetime channel movie about a woman who witnesses her father and his fiancee's murder it's simply lousy acting to say the least a boring lackluster storyline It's just simply boring.