futuretype

T I wanted to see how they adapted the book into a movie. I wondered if they would keep the three perspectives and jumping around in time. They did; they shouldn't have.

I found it hard to follow and i had just read the book. I can see why it wasn't a box office success. It didn't help that they treated it like a horror film when it was a mystery story. It was well acted but the story was a challenge to keep track of, and the jerky camera movements were distracting. The absence of a music sound track in most scenes didn't help.

The use of the three perspectives was intergral to the book (not sure i can say the same thing for the jumping around in time sequences, except perhaps the flashbacks to the drunken night that was hard to recall) but the movie should have just followed a chronological order. It would have given time to flesh out the characters and allow the audience to follow the plot. It may have not been true to the book's format but it would have been a better movie and still retained the essence.

This show "Accused" is reminiscent of the television series "Motive" where each episode reveals the killer and the victim at the beginning; and the rest of the episode details the ongoing investigation. In this show we start with an "accused" and then go back in time through the events that lead up to why the person is "accused." The pacing is similar along with limited use of music and the type of camera angles and relatively lengthy film shots.

What it doesn't have is the same detectives investigating and solving the cases so there is no one to relate to as new characters and situations are introduced in each episode.