9 reviews
- claudio_carvalho
- May 18, 2010
- Permalink
- angeladavis49
- Sep 27, 2023
- Permalink
FRAMED FOR MURDER (TV movie 2007)
3 out of 10 stars Time to Read: 2:20 min
BASIC PLOT: June, a weak, mentally unstable woman is framed for her abusive husband's murder. Rather than fight the charges, she accepts a plea deal, and serves eight years for manslaughter. Her sister Claire (Susan Walters) takes custody of June's son, with her husband, Jason (Perry King).
June emerges from prison a changed woman. Determined to get her life back, and prove her innocence, not just for herself, but for her son as well, she begins a targeted campaign against her husband's killer. She enlists the help of her former cellmate, Charlie (Claire Brosseau), and Charlie's brother, Victor (Jonathan Higgins). They seek the help of PI, Diane Desalvo (Lisa Langlois), an old family friend. But their fact-finding mission has drawn unwanted attention from the real killer, and one of them won't survive.
Will June learn the truth about why she was framed? Will she ever be able to clear her name, and be reunited with her son? Or will she meet the same grizzly end as her ill-fated husband?
WHAT WORKS: *THE MOVIE IS SHOT WELL Douglas Jackson never phones in his movies. This is directed, and shot well thanks to Jackson, and his cinematographer, Bert Tougas.
WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *THE POLICE TELL JUNE, THERE ARE NO BRUISES ON HER PERSON, BUT HER CLOTHES ARE RIPPED, AND THERE ARE SIGNS OF A STRUGGLE Police know, especially by 2007, that some abusers are keen not to leave evidence, like black eyes, or broken bones, on abused women. We never see her Mirandized BEFORE she's questioned, either. They never ask questions, like -Who called the police to the house? There's a lot of information that's just brushed over, so she takes the plea deal, and goes to prison for eight years. That's sloppy writing by Christine Conradt & Richard Dana Smith.
*WE NEVER GET THE BACKSTORY ON EVIL SISTER, CLAIRE, & THE BLONDE GARDNER, NICK How do Claire (Susan Walters) and Nick (Kevin Jubinville) get together? How does their affair begin? What's his involvement? Why is he willing to kill for Claire? These are questions we SHOULD have answered by the time the movie is 2/3rds over, but again, they are just brushed over.
*THIS FEELS LIKE CHRISTINE CONRADT REWORKED ONE OF HER PREVIOUS, MORE SUCCESSFUL SCRIPTS and came up with nothing! This movie has many of the same plotlines as Mon ancien amant (2006), but not done as successfully. The filmmakers even use a redhead for the main character (just like in Mon ancien amant (2006)). It was a fine made-for-tv melodrama, this is not.
*PACING IS OFF By the 1:15 mark, I'm thinking of fast forwarding through, because nothing is happening. I should say, the same stuff is happening that happened 30 min ago, the same fights, the same break-downs, THE SAME!
*CHARACTERS ARE TOO ONE DIMENSIONAL I know this is a melodrama, BUT, you have to have more story if I'm supposed to engage with the movie. The story is flat & repetitive, and there's not enough character development/backstory for me to care about any of these people. Not one of Christine Conradt better scripts.
*THE SON, IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT Neither Claire, or June, seem to have much feeling, or thoughts for him. Claire had been raising him for the last eight years, but remarks they'll find a good home for him, like he's an unwanted puppy. He is June's biological son, yet she seems not to care, and therefore it feels tacked on, and not needed.
TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *I can't recommend this movie. It is a bad redo of Mon ancien amant (2006), and even though that has a few problems, it's a fun time waster. This is not fun, and is instead just a waste of your time.
CLOSING NOTES: *This is a made-for-tv movie, please keep that in mind before you watch/rate it. TV movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.
*I have no connection to the film, or production in ANY way. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.
BASIC PLOT: June, a weak, mentally unstable woman is framed for her abusive husband's murder. Rather than fight the charges, she accepts a plea deal, and serves eight years for manslaughter. Her sister Claire (Susan Walters) takes custody of June's son, with her husband, Jason (Perry King).
June emerges from prison a changed woman. Determined to get her life back, and prove her innocence, not just for herself, but for her son as well, she begins a targeted campaign against her husband's killer. She enlists the help of her former cellmate, Charlie (Claire Brosseau), and Charlie's brother, Victor (Jonathan Higgins). They seek the help of PI, Diane Desalvo (Lisa Langlois), an old family friend. But their fact-finding mission has drawn unwanted attention from the real killer, and one of them won't survive.
Will June learn the truth about why she was framed? Will she ever be able to clear her name, and be reunited with her son? Or will she meet the same grizzly end as her ill-fated husband?
WHAT WORKS: *THE MOVIE IS SHOT WELL Douglas Jackson never phones in his movies. This is directed, and shot well thanks to Jackson, and his cinematographer, Bert Tougas.
WHAT DOESN'T WORK: *THE POLICE TELL JUNE, THERE ARE NO BRUISES ON HER PERSON, BUT HER CLOTHES ARE RIPPED, AND THERE ARE SIGNS OF A STRUGGLE Police know, especially by 2007, that some abusers are keen not to leave evidence, like black eyes, or broken bones, on abused women. We never see her Mirandized BEFORE she's questioned, either. They never ask questions, like -Who called the police to the house? There's a lot of information that's just brushed over, so she takes the plea deal, and goes to prison for eight years. That's sloppy writing by Christine Conradt & Richard Dana Smith.
*WE NEVER GET THE BACKSTORY ON EVIL SISTER, CLAIRE, & THE BLONDE GARDNER, NICK How do Claire (Susan Walters) and Nick (Kevin Jubinville) get together? How does their affair begin? What's his involvement? Why is he willing to kill for Claire? These are questions we SHOULD have answered by the time the movie is 2/3rds over, but again, they are just brushed over.
*THIS FEELS LIKE CHRISTINE CONRADT REWORKED ONE OF HER PREVIOUS, MORE SUCCESSFUL SCRIPTS and came up with nothing! This movie has many of the same plotlines as Mon ancien amant (2006), but not done as successfully. The filmmakers even use a redhead for the main character (just like in Mon ancien amant (2006)). It was a fine made-for-tv melodrama, this is not.
*PACING IS OFF By the 1:15 mark, I'm thinking of fast forwarding through, because nothing is happening. I should say, the same stuff is happening that happened 30 min ago, the same fights, the same break-downs, THE SAME!
*CHARACTERS ARE TOO ONE DIMENSIONAL I know this is a melodrama, BUT, you have to have more story if I'm supposed to engage with the movie. The story is flat & repetitive, and there's not enough character development/backstory for me to care about any of these people. Not one of Christine Conradt better scripts.
*THE SON, IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT Neither Claire, or June, seem to have much feeling, or thoughts for him. Claire had been raising him for the last eight years, but remarks they'll find a good home for him, like he's an unwanted puppy. He is June's biological son, yet she seems not to care, and therefore it feels tacked on, and not needed.
TO RECOMMEND, OR NOT TO RECOMMEND, THAT IS THE QUESTION: *I can't recommend this movie. It is a bad redo of Mon ancien amant (2006), and even though that has a few problems, it's a fun time waster. This is not fun, and is instead just a waste of your time.
CLOSING NOTES: *This is a made-for-tv movie, please keep that in mind before you watch/rate it. TV movies have a much lower budget, and so your expectations should be adjusted.
*I have no connection to the film, or production in ANY way. This review was NOT written in full, or in part, by a bot. I am just an honest viewer, who wishes for more straight forward reviews (less trolls and fanboys), and better entertainment. Hope I helped you out.
- vnssyndrome89
- Aug 17, 2024
- Permalink
- vchimpanzee
- Jul 20, 2009
- Permalink
The acting in Framed For Murder is so one paced. The story of a bi-polar woman framed for murder is predictable. Personally I wouldn't waste any time on this.
- iancrockford-96309
- Feb 22, 2019
- Permalink
......It's a low budget TV movie. Yes plot, acting and pretty much everything has a lot to be desired.
It's not fair that movies like this get compared to ones made with budgets of hundreds of millions. Whilst I know there are some gems made with low budgets.
If framed for murder is available and you have nothing better to do give it a go.
I give it six stars, had it been big budget primo Hollywood movie it would be two stars.
If framed for murder is available and you have nothing better to do give it a go.
I give it six stars, had it been big budget primo Hollywood movie it would be two stars.
My God, what trash. Badly written and super badly acted. I was saying some of the lines before the so-called actors actually said them. To begin with, the plot was stupid and characters so dumb, not to figure out the truth. Even an idiot could figure this one out. In leading roles, June Baldwin had one expression - duh! She couldn't even talk right. Over acting throughout. Hard to believe how stupid she was in this. Somebody brush her hair. She looks like she went through a wind tunnel. Then there's her ugly sister, played by the inept, one look actress, Susan Walters. Not much in her talent either. No matter they play sisters, they are equally bad in this. Add another loser role for Perry King, who seems to be getting worse and worse each time I see him. The big question is why does he do these empty headed films? Of course he's not the best of actors, but still has his looks. He needs to get into comedies and drawing room stuff to match his wardrobe. I understand he's a nice guy off screen. Somebody give the guy a break and cast him in something suitable.
Kevin Jubinville, a so so actor plays the heavy with not too much expression. And one of my horrors, Sophie Gendron, with her lip enhancement, is fortunately in this for a short time. Three actors save this trite vacant movie; Lisa Langlois as a private eye, Claire Brosseau as the best friend and Jonathan Higgins as the new love interest. These three save the movie in this viewers mind. Without them it would be unbearable to watch.
Kevin Jubinville, a so so actor plays the heavy with not too much expression. And one of my horrors, Sophie Gendron, with her lip enhancement, is fortunately in this for a short time. Three actors save this trite vacant movie; Lisa Langlois as a private eye, Claire Brosseau as the best friend and Jonathan Higgins as the new love interest. These three save the movie in this viewers mind. Without them it would be unbearable to watch.