Avaliações de usuários

The film faithfully reproduces very well what happened to Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito, and to the whole investigation. This was the purpose of the film, and this goal has been achieved. It is not a film to be re-made, or to be burned up. Maybe, the only inaccuracy in the film, for me was that Raffaele Sollecito has never said that Amanda had gone out the night of the murder, he only stated that he had smoked a joint that night, after seeing a movie ,and has confused memories,but for what he remembered Amanda had never left his house We recommend viewing, because it is interesting and well done. Very nice interpretation of Hayden Panettiere (Amanda)

In 2007 Perugia, Italy, Amanda Knox (Hayden Panettiere) and boyfriend Raffaele Sollecito (Paolo Romio) call the police for a possible break-in. Then the body of her roommate Meredith Kercher is found locked in her room. In a long flashback, Amanda is an eager university girl from Seattle who wants to spend a year in Italy. She and Sollecito become prime suspect and eventually convicted for the Kercher murder.

I really like the start with the movie getting right into the case. Then the movie goes back to a very bland flashback. Anything significant gleamed from the flashback can easily be included later on in smaller snippets. It's only ten minutes but it sucks out much of the early tension. Generally, this is an acceptable TV movie with Panettiere keeping the character compelling to watch. There is no doubt that this is exploitation TV but it's relatively well-made. It's not trying to take an obvious side but that can also make the movie less dramatic.

This film was pretty well done. I do think they could have picked better people for some of the roles, but overall, good acting. Pretty good scripts and a good movie to sit down and engage yourself in. A good movie just to have on in the background while you're doing the dishes or cooking. This case is so fascinating to me, I really cannot say that it was a dull film. It was interesting the whole time and I felt I was part of the film. That I wasn't just watching, but I was connecting with Amanda Knox and feeling her pain. I cringe at some parts because they seem so painful to deal with. I give it a 7 because of these reasons, and because I know it could have been better.

• Kelsy

Of all "true stories" I've ever seen, this is by far the worst ever, this film is beyond belief, how come the research is so poor and superficial ?

This film fails at being true,it's inconsistent and poorly researched, if you know something about Mario Spezi and Amanda Knox, then you also know that Giuliano Mignini lacks all ability for common sense and can never seem to provide ANY UNALTERED evidence.

I came across this Amanda's case while reading a book called " the monster of Florence" an amazing chronicle of mediocrity and corruption during one of the most well know cases of serial murders in Italy.

Giuliano Magnini, the prosecutor fabricated evidence, played with it, invented a orgy/drugs/sex/blood sect, (sound familiar?) sent a respected reporter to jail, tapped phones.... was even given a conviction and jail time ... and guess what, due to the system in Italy he can still be a prosecutor and worst, can do the same all over again !

He landed Amanda's case and with it is trying to create a smoke curtain to erase his past, how unfortunate this young lady was, to fall victim to this monster, to get a mentally unstable man as her prosecutor, a man that will do and lie shamelessly to make his point, a man that even refused to accept other man's innocence because it contradicted his case.

The real criminal is Giuliano Mignini, a monster that in the USA will be locked for life for what he has done, yes ... he is the one prosecuting Amanda.

Do yourselves a favor, if you like true crime, read The Monster of Florence by Douglas Preston and Mario Spezi

EDIT : - Well, we all know better now, Amanda is free, a mistake of the justice system in Italy, admitted by them, the evidence was all fabricated or non existing, no DNA just a crazy prosecutor and a lot of crazy people around him. This films hould be removed, burned and re made.

The murder of Meredith Kercher is already one of the crimes of the century, and will probably remain so for all time because only four people know what happened that fateful night in Perugia: three of them are proved liars, and the fourth must be forever silent.

Like the murder of Mary Phagan and the murder of Beryl Evans and her daughter Geraldine, there are other suspects. At the time, Evans was the only real suspect for the double murder, while the conviction of Leo Frank was based heavily on the testimony of a man who admitted being a party to the crime. Likewise the presence of Rudy Guede at the crime scene in Perugia cannot be ruled out, but does the murder require the presence of any other individual? This film argues compellingly that it does. Since its release there have been further legal developments which will continue for at least the next two years, and what then?

"...Murder On Trial In Italy" is very well researched, and Hayden Panettiere plays the enigmatic Knox to a tee. It is clear from the opening scene that she and her Harry Potter lookalike boyfriend have something to hide. There are no concessions here to the extraordinarily effective public relations campaign conducted by the Knox family, and whatever mistakes the Italian police may have made, the exhaustive forensic and legal analysis made all the way up to to Italy's highest criminal court more than compensates for it.

The film-makers have used a little poetic licence, and may not have solved the mystery entirely, but it is doubtful if anyone else will come closer anytime soon.

This movie promotes several gross distortions which CBS News Crimesider, for one, has identified. Example: in one scene Amanda knew too much prior to her interrogation, such as how her friend Amanda had died. CBS CrimeSider calls this one of the five biggest lies in the film. And yes, it was not in the trial either.

Why was Amanda's interrogation not recorded? Why did the prosecution's forensic team not testify in the trial about any crime scene cleanup? Why did the police, while testing, destroy the hard-drives of the computer which Amanda and Raffaele said they were using that night? Why are so many other facts misreported in newspapers and TV? The movie does not answer any of those questions truthfully, or even raise them. It is mysterious. It seems to be a commercial game. Or maybe they are just "giving Amanda and Raffaele a bad time." In this movie, a blonde Italian-American Hollywood woman acts out a screenplay to portray a red-haired Scottish-American honor student from Seattle as if she were a bratty, suspicious and brazen character. Someone has friends in low places.

I live in Italy and followed this case closely from the very beginning. I thought I knew the case well, but the movie revealed details and sequences of events that I didn't remember.

Now I am not at all surprised that on March 26, 2013, Italy's highest criminal court overturned the acquittal of Knox in the murder of her British roommate and ordered a new trial. A shame that Miss Knox will probably not be present in the courtroom, as she has returned to the States.

I'm glad that I watched the movie. It was well done. I would recommend it to anyone who followed the case as closely as I did. It just reconfirmed what I already believed by adding even more detail. That is, whatever her role in the murder, she was there. yep.

Amanda Knox: Murder on Trial in Italy (2011)

** (out of 4)

American girl Amanda Knox (Hayden Panettiere) travels to Italy to study but soon she's accused of murdering her roommate with the assistance of her boyfriend and another guy. Soon Knox's sex life and strange behavior become the key evidence in the trial, which she's convicted of but many seem to think a crooked Prosecutor is to blame. I first heard of this case soon after the real events happened and I remember that for the next year or so every media group was on the side that pointed the finger of guilt at Amanda. I lost track of the case until 60 Minutes did another episode on it and to my shock now everyone was saying that the girl was innocent and being framed by a questionable Prosecutor. This made-for-TV drama from Lifetime doesn't try to pretend to be a documentary and instead it purely wants to show that Amanda is innocent but for some strange reason the movie is never able to do this. There's no doubt that the intent behind this movie is to say that the Italian courts are full of evil people wanting to harm this angel-faced girl from Seattle but I personally need a lot more than just this. Not once are we ever really given an explanation for why Knox is innocent other than the Italians are bad people. This doesn't work for a number of reasons but the biggest one, in terms of this film, is that the Italian members are constantly made to give evil looks to the camera and after a while this just becomes laughable and it's a rather cheap way to try and make them look evil. I kept expecting the director and screenwriter to dress them all in black, put a mask on them and put knives in their hands. Another thing that doesn't work in the picture is that we never really get to understand the case, what actually happened or what might have happened. Yes, there are several re-enactments but they're all handled so poorly that you can't help but feel letdown. As with most "true story" movies, this one here changes a few facts around and tells a few lies of its own so needless to say people shouldn't be watching this thing expecting a documentary. I think the film should have tried to make its case a lot better and all in all it really does feel rushed and all over the place as if the filmmakers weren't sure what they wanted to tell or try to tell. The performances aren't too bad with Panettiere doing a nice job as Knox. I thought she was a lot better when she started to crack from the pressure and she's also quite nice when it comes time to address the courts. Vincent Riotta steals the film as the Prosecutor and Paolo Romio is good in his bit of Amanda's boyfriend. Marcia Gay Harden plays Amanda's mother and she's a tad bit too over-the-top during a few scenes. The story of Amanda Knox is far from over and let's hope a better movie will come out whenever the real story gets solved.

Very interesting presentation causing one to shift in belief about innocence or guilt. Initially I thought it was a fluff piece giving Amanda Knox a pass but then it tells the other stories from the other players and a strong picture of guilt emerges. I won't tell you whose. After following the actual trial pretty closely I thought this film presented all sides with precision. I don't know how well it depicts the emotion of the real characters but it seems like everything was well researched. The only fault I can find is Hayden did not really manifest that icy cold stare and personality that has been testified to by numerous players. The guard in the prison and two accusers for example. She was called the "ice maiden" by a guard and anti-social. HP's portrayal is much more girl-next-door and is fairly one-dimensional.

The problem I have with this movie is that the story is entirely one sided, presenting only the view of the prosecutor's team.

And anyone over the age of 2 should know that there's always at least two sides to a story. It leaves me with the feeling that this was a rush job, more geared to capitalize on the immediate media frenzy to capture audience, than to present the truth; and that is very indefensible, as this film deals with a true story, not a fictional Hollywood script.

For the love of God, didn't the producers of this film know that the victim as well as the accused were/are real people, some fighting for their very lives? Shouldn't they at least have tried to get a rounded version of the story down? Instead, they simple took the story provided by a man (Mignini) that has been proved since to be more than a little bit unhinged.

It's a lot easier to get audience with story of sex, demonic rituals, violence and death, than it is with one of questionable law enforcement and plain lunatic characters.

For shame....

Art

They claim this is a true story but it contains many inaccuracies. Amanda was not at the crime scene when Meredith died, but in this movie she is. I think many people would like to watch this movie now that there is renewed interest in this case. Lifetime showed this movie once and it got good ratings. However there are some things in the film that are not unlike slander, so I think Lifetime put it away and hoped we would forget about it. I think they could edit out some stuff and voice over some new lines to make the story more true. Otherwise this movie is worth watching and it is a shame nobody will get to see it again. I think we all know what happened to Amanda at the end, but her life has changed a lot since this movie was made.