Murder in Mind

A number of reviews of this film mention "late night" and I think it's quite suitable for that kind of viewing. That's how and where I found it. I happened to be sick as a dog with a bad cough/cold, spending the overnight in a hotel not far from work due to a snow/ice storm that prevented me from driving home. Waking up in the middle of the night to calm my cough, I turned on the TV somewhere just after this film had recently started on a cable channel.

The story was off-balanced, weaving in and out of alternate realities, memories, hypnosis, and an overarching crime drama. It seemed a total mess, yet like a train wreck, it made me want to keep watching. Unfortunately, the ravages of my cold had me drifting off back to sleep before I could see where it was all leading.

That led me to wanting to find a re-broadcast or find it on home video. The best I could do in the early age of DVDs was to locate a VHS tape of it to finally see it all the way through. It made a lot more sense when I watched the whole thing, though it's still not what you'd call a great movie.

Still, something about it raises it above other 'bad' movies, so I've rated it a perhaps generous 7 out of 10 for its fascination factor.

The plot of this movie is as dumb as a bag of hair. Jimmy Smit plays a character that could have been upset by the ridiculousness of the story. He is evil and a wife beater. It's a character as far from his NYPD and LA Law roles as you could possibly get.

If you've thought he had the looks and the acting chops to play the really bad boy role, her's your present.

But!!!!!!!! Mary Louis Parker wears black miniskirts and little black minidresses throughout the movie.

She has always had some of the greatest legs in the history of the movies. This makes the movie well worth it for this leg admirer.

I'd buy the DVD for this reason only if it was available.

Someone should teach the people who made this movie that there is a difference between "presenting multiple twists" and "screwing the audience over". They even use hypnosis as a tool to cover up the plot holes; whenever they can't find their way into or out of a scene, they just say "she is regressing to her past now" or "she's snapping out of it now", and they think that explains everything. This movie is a dishonest cheat and in the last 20 minutes becomes a full-blown fiasco. (*1/2)

A good cast... A good idea but turns out it is flawed as hypnosis is not allowed as evidence in courts. So many good actors and they are all acting so badly! So why did they all get attracted to this mess... And yes it has its good points such as lighting etc... But ultimately I wondered two things.... How could so much talent lead to such a bizarre mess? What is that accent that Nigel Hawthorne is putting on? He is/was a great actor and so what is that accent all about? It is impossible to identify? What was he trying to do? Maybe it is his subtle indication as if to say to us: 'I've got involved with a turkey so here's a crap accent to go with it!'

If you remember the writer of this piece, it's the same guy who wrote and directed the agonizing garbage 'Jack Frost'. Much better this time around with this. I enjoyed it and was worth the time to see to it's finish. The plot's a bit confusing and there were evident holes but Mary-Louise's protrayal of her character bails'em out. Decent enough to earn my 7 rating.