Without Evidence

This movie rides on Angelina Jolie's name (and that's in retrospect looking at it from now)--she's not even a primary character here. She's a passing character here. This is (albeit announced as so) a story based on a real event, that basically follows the storyline to a: "Is that it???" You might as well watch an episode of America's Unsolved Mysteries (or whatever it was called). This takes you through a true occurrence that was never solved. BUT...it leaves you at the same place.... STILL UNSOLVED!!! What's worse is that it doesn't really leave you with anything to "chew" on (i.e., something to talk about at work or with friends/family to talk about). It just...ends. It doesn't even leave you with captions for "if you have seen call..." This movie is essentially HALF a movie that leaves you at the, "What's gonna happen now???" point. And there is no, "What's gonna happen now," the credits start rolling...

I put this film in my Amazon Prime queue because I was living in Oregon at the time of Michael Francke's murder.

It starts with a clip from "Unsolved Mysteries," and the rest of the movie has about the same production values, including the cheesy preview scenes. It was fun seeing scenes of Oregon and recognizing a couple of Portland stage actors, but otherwise, I lost interest, despite having seen the story play out in nightly news reports for months.

Written in part by a journalist who has dedicated much of his career to this true story, it unsurprisingly doesn't deviate from the perspective that the conspiracy the movie presents is true. It may well be the case that the version of events on offer here is the truth, unfortunately, that doesn't guarantee a well-told story. The quality is a little rough around the edges. For a movie so focused on a real-life story, it's really lacking in telling that story. Everything just tends to drift by from scene to scene with very little fleshed out. It gives the impression that the makers were overly cautious, and as such used as little creative license as possible. This movie presents its story at the expense of entertaining you. The main cast do put in a good shift and work well with what they're given. Don't be fooled by the cover as Angelina Jolie isn't in the movie for long, but she does steal the show when she appears. The ending might well be as far as the story goes at the time of filming, but it won't leave any satisfaction.

This movie said it was based on a true story so I thought it might be interesting. From the start the movie was disappointing.Little information is built upon the characters leaving you not knowing enough about any of them for them to be very likable. Just when the movie seems to be going in the right direction it falls short. Situations develop but with little detail. There seemed to be too much information trying to be crammed into the movie.It was like one scene he asked for the autopsy report and ,cut, next scene he gets the report in the mail.Toward the end of the movie I just kept wondering when is the movie going to be over. Then the ending is there and you don't even know it because the whole movie just drags on. It ends so abruptly that you still have questions, but really you could care less if they are answered.A total waste of time and money.

I recently watched Without Evidence (1995) on Tubi. The film is based on the true story of a correctional officer who mysteriously disappeared, with a man determined to uncover the truth. As he delves into the circumstances surrounding the disappearance, he encounters witnesses whose accounts don't quite add up. A $1,000,000 reward is offered for information, but will it be enough to solve the case?

Directed by Gil Dennis (Intermission), the film stars Scott Plank (Holes), Anna Gunn (Breaking Bad), Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider), and Andrew Prine (Gettysburg).

Unfortunately, the main character's performance severely undercuts the film's authenticity. The acting across the board is average, which is surprising given the strength of the cast. The premise had potential, and there's an air of mystery throughout, but the film falters due to weak writing, casting, and execution. Jolie's portrayal is particularly jarring-her youthful, less mature performance makes her feel out of place but still must watch. The low-budget cinematography also does little to elevate the story.

In conclusion, Without Evidence had the ingredients for an intriguing mystery, but poor execution and lackluster performances let it down. I'd rate it a 3.5/10 and recommend skipping it.