Before and After (1996) User Reviews (65)

severe plot line problem

[jesbeard · 5/10 · 20 February 2006]

While not a terrible movie it has a few serious problems. The problems start with the casting. Edward Furlong is cast to play the 16 year old son of parents played by Meryl Streep and Liam Neeson, but at age 16 he appears to be roughly five inches shorter than Streep and is utterly dwarfed by Neeson. Furlong looks more like he was their 12 year old son than their 16 year old son.

Next problem is that certain points you need to catch at the beginning of the film simply slip by far to fast to catch. In a murder mystery or something with major plot twists that might be tolerable, but not in your ordinary family drama.

But to me the most troubling problem (and if you are determined to see the movie regardless you might not want to read on, because this will give away most of the movie) is that it simply does not make sense.

The story is Furlong has pulled off the road with his girlfriend and parked in the snow, gets stuck, they argue and tussle with each other, with him pushing her and accidentally causing her to fall face-first on the car jack. He then flees. She's found, rushed to the hospital and dies. The movie then deals with the family struggle of how to deal with this in court. Getting the kids' story out takes at least half the movie and by the time it gets out things are moving fast and little things, like making sense, get lost in the wake. If Furlong and the girlfriend TOGETHER had been absolutely unable to get the car out of the snow, and the deep rut he had made in it, it makes no sense that after she is spread out on the ground and unable to help he then gets the the car out by himself -- that is the kind of inconsistency any prosecuting attorney would have latched onto, and which any defense attorney would have seen as a major problem in court (I make these comments as a criminal defense attorney).

But that's not the only problem with the kid's story. It was supposedly an accident. He cared about her. He never wanted to hurt her. And yet after she is hurt he cleans up the scene, gets that stuck car out of there, leaves, she is found and is STILL ALIVE long enough for an ambulance to reach her, get her to an emergency room and have a serious effort to save her life before she dies on the table in the ER. The entire issue of her having BEEN ALIVE and left to die is ignored. Not mentioned once by him, his family, the girl's grieving mother, his defense attorney, the prosecution or the judge who heard the case. It is as if the director forgot that in the second scene in the movie we see Meryly Streep, a doctor in the film, called to the ER to help with efforts to save the girl, long before we know her son was involved in the girl's death. The scene leaves no doubt (I went back and watched it a second time to be sure because the inconsistency seemed so glaring) that the girl was still alive when she reached the ER.

But she was left to die by the kid for whom we are supposed to feel sympathy.

Not only are there problems with the issue not having been properly addressed by any of the characters who would have addressed it, the fact that we need to feel sympathy for the kid is a problem. Easy to feel sympathy for him in having his life thrown into chaos as a result of an accident.... hard to feel sympathy when he would have had to have left his girlfriend there to die, and when in cleaning up the scene he would have had to have had enough contact with her (she fell on the car jack, and he removed the jack and put it back in the trunk of the car) that he certainly should have noticed she was still alive.

Despite strong performances from the actors and good cinematography, the movie was a bit disappointing because of direction, casting and the script.

Huge potential-bad script

[xsnowangelx · 6/10 · 10 November 2005]

'Before and After' is the kind of movie that you expect to be really fantastic. Great actors, good plot. It has huge potential. Unfortunately, the actual script seriously flaws this movie. There stand brilliant actors such as Liam Neeson, Meryl Streep, and Edward Furlong. But the actual words coming out of their mouths were often so silly, it makes you wonder how the same person who wrote 'The Silence of the Lambs' also wrote this screenplay. Overall, despite the script flaws, it has quite a good mystery, and besides the young daughter, a brilliant cast. It is worth a watch, if just for the main casts' beautiful performances.

should have been a Lifetime original movie

[blanche-2 · 5/10 · 15 September 2001]

This is an all too common problem: someone somewhere convinces bona fide movie stars, in this case Meryl Streep and Liam Neeson, no less, to appear in a feature film that, without movie star names attached, would have ended up as made for TV. This is a weak script with bad, predictable dialogue - very disappointing with such a cast. With some reworking, it might have been a very powerful family story, perhaps never as compelling as Ordinary People, for instance, but better than it was.

A Moderately interesting character study of a family in crisis.

[TxMike · 19 August 2000]

"Before and After" has a fine premise - the girlfriend of their 16-yr-old son is found apparently murdered in the snow and the parents struggle with what to do. Eventually, when the son goes A.W.O.L., they suspect he commited a murder, and the whole family struggles with what to do. The father finds bloody items in the trunk of the car and is able to dispose of them before the sheriff returns with a search warrant. Eventually the son shows up, the father and mother disagree on what to do, the younger sister gets upset.

"Before and After" also has some of the finest actors of our day - Liam Neeson as the father, Meryl Streep as the mother, Daniel Von Bargen as the sheriff.

But, somehow the movie only works moderately well. Some of the dialog is a bit dubious, some of the scenes are over-dramatic. I suppose it is a function of so-so writing and directing.

Still, it is a film that kept my interest very well. The story got me to thinking what I would have done if any of my teenage children had gotten into a similar bind. With a great writer and director this could have been a "10" movie. I rate it 7 of 10.

Average.

[gridoon · 6/10 · 7 May 2003]

The locations are pleasing to the eye, and Meryl Streep is effortlessly convincing as the mother. But Liam Neeson's performance doesn't ring true for a moment, Edward Furlong appears to be less shocked by the gruesome events than simply stoned, and the outcome of the plot is awkward and unconvincing. "Before and After" is basically a small-scale family melodrama that belongs on the TV screen; without these high-profile actors, I wonder if it would ever have gotten theatrical distribution. (**1/2)

Family drama with an ethics theme

[cliffs_of_fall · 7/10 · 8 September 2010]

If you've read to this point in the reviews then I suppose you will not be distressed by spoilers, but be on the alert. I discuss the ending. Spoilers coming.

This movie is about a family in crisis and I found it quite involving overall. It also raises ponder-worthy questions about personal and legal ethics. I was afraid it would end in typical Hollywood style with the kid getting off scotfree. But telling the truth doesn't give him a pass; he must suffer the consequences of his actions.

Of course the aggressive gotta-win attorney thinks his clients have acted in their own worst interests. But have they? Father and son do some prison time and then, the film suggests, the family heals and each member of it can move forward with a clear conscience.

I agree with some of the complaints aired here by others but not all. I thought the production values were fine. It's a cold movie, a twilight and night movie, and the murky snow-filled landscapes and shadowy interiors seemed perfect. I don't see how anyone can complain about Meryl Streep's performance, which is understated and nuanced. Neeson's character is fierce; it's gotta be played fiercely and Neeson comports himself well. The son and daughter were not as effective; these young actors lack vocal power and fail to put across any subtext.

Engrossing and worth seeing despite its flaws

[tobydammit-2 · 7/10 · 28 July 2022]

VERY similar plot to the Apple-TV drama "Defending Jacob" (and ironically the boy accused of murder in this film is also named Jacob), although this has a much better ending. It feels like a made-for-TV movie, but not so bad that it detracts from the joy of watching Liam Neeson and Meryl Streep together in good dramatic scenes, with fine supporting performances by Alfred Molina and Daniel von Bargen. Edward Furlong was unfortunately still playing the smug punk he played in Terminator 2 and did not emote properly for this part. The plot is engrossing, however, with some twists and turns that keep you watching till the end to find out what happens. I found the ending very realistic and (thankfully) not sugar-coated or idiotic. Will stimulate conversation about ethics, conscience, justice and naivete.

Weird flaws that irked me were: Both parents testifying to the grand jury WITHOUT their lawyer present, an interlude of gratuitous sex between the parents at a juncture when they were both too emotionally devastated to be doing that, and the mother blithely saying "I have to go on with my life" and go back to work when her son has been missing for days and she was presumably an emotional wreck.

Surprisingly good

[zinesandskafiends · 7/10 · 29 June 2006]

From the beginning I had my doubts about this film. During the opening scene, I braced myself for an onslaught of Sundance clichés, but as the film progressed, I was pleasantly surprised. Before and After is a gem of a character study with believable performances by Meryl Streep and Edward Furlong. Liam Neeson's performance as a father with a reserved psychotic sense of protection toward his son is one of the film's highlights. There were some weak spots in the dialogue, but otherwise the script was well-written and engaging.

Be prepared to be sucked into this movie; it's slow-paced, but the subtle suspense will make it nearly impossible to stop watching. Just when you think the film has told its story and can't develop any further, you discover that you've seen the beginning of Act II instead of the film's climax.

'Truth' vs. 'Justice' in OK drama

[Libretio · 4/10 · 3 February 2005]

BEFORE AND AFTER

Aspect ratio: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

A middle-class New England family is forced to confront a range of difficult issues when the eldest child (Edward Furlong) is accused of murdering his girlfriend (Alison Folland).

Barbet Schroeder's earnest drama looks and feels like a big-screen TV movie, toplined by A-list stars and filmed with professional elegance on wintry New England locations. Schroeder struggles to avoid melodrama and mawkishness, resulting in a lack of tension, as parents Meryl Streep and Liam Neeson become torn between protecting their son and telling the truth about his possible involvement in Folland's death. Frustrated lawyer Alfred Molina makes the point that 'truth' has little or no bearing on the criminal justice system, where defence and prosecution teams become engaged in brinkmanship designed to sway the jury one way or another. Ted Tally's screenplay makes a number of similar points, but the narrative begins to drift around the halfway mark and never really recovers. Some will be won over by the cast and production values, others won't be so forgiving.

"after" all, we're still here

[lee_eisenberg · 6/10 · 3 July 2006]

"Before and After" isn't any kind of great movie, but an interesting look at situations going out of control. Meryl Streep and Liam Neeson turn in their usual good performances, as does Edward Furlong. It's just that this story of parents having to deal with their son getting accused of murder is sort of routine (although some scenes are pretty intense). It seems like Streep and Neeson deserve something a little more than this. The people behind the movie probably could have developed things a little further.

All in all, this movie's worth seeing, if only once. Also starring Alfred Molina, Daniel Von Bargen (Commandant Spengler on "Malcolm in the Middle") and John Heard.

Not Credible, a Low Point for Neeson and Streep

[fouregycats · 3/10 · 2 March 2017]

A well-off family suffers a crisis when their teenaged son is accused of killing a girl he was dating.

The plot develops as expected, with the police suspicions wearing away at the parents' denial, especially the father's.

I found the film's dialogue annoying, the characters unlikable, and I was totally surprised that Streep and Neeson would appear in it.

Not recommended unless there's nothing else to watch or you don't mind watching a film while in a state of continual annoyance.

There but for the grace of God....

[gleywong · 8/10 · 2 January 2004]

Reading the majority of comments about "Before and After," I wanted to guess the commentators'ages (mostly in their twenties - thirties?) and to assume that they were either childless or had never raised teenagers. As announced by the young voice when the movie opens, this is a story of daily life that was changed in an instant, and that afterwards, the family was never the same again. It sounds like a tautology, but most of our lives are not interesting enough as material for the movies, and it is a rare script and director that can show "daily life" and have anyone praise its results. Ordinary dialogue, too, is a challenge, because people as a rule don't speak in great cadences. Moreover, if one is looking at the movies today, anything that is not "family drama" contains a volley of expletives that passes for dialogue. So it is understandable that this movie did not rate high in the minds of the x-generation.

As a parent of teens, however, I found the film quite true to life. It's basically about how parents respond to a dire family crisis and how they must adjust to each other as a unit. We see how the son, as played by young Ed Furlong, is affected by the shock of this event. As an actor, his fine portrayal as the sensitive young writer in "Grass Harp" is a parallel role and should be mentioned. As for the parents, Streep was drawing on her experience as a mother of three and was not "acting" in the way one saw her in her obviously great roles, such as "Sophie's Choice" or "Out of Africa." This was a subtler challenge for her. With Neeson, also a father in real life, he chose to portray the father as impulsive, strong and the embodiment of unconditional parental love. I felt that the parents were meant to be somewhat opposites and complementary-- she contemplative, more intellectual and sympathetic, he aggressive, protective and reactive.

Some viewers were disturbed by the unbalanced and unsympathetic portrayal of the dead girl's mother and the dead girl herself. How could it be otherwise and not be told from Jacob or Jude's point of view? This is not "Rashomon" -- we were not meant to have different points of view defended. However, the very casting of the mother and of the girl friend as being less well educated and of a different "class," was obvious, and another "true thing" that often happens in families. Here, however,it is not the parents' disapproval that is important, but how they respond to their son's guilt.

Some viewers might say that my comments betray my being manipulated. Well, all viewers are being manipulated in any movie, and a measure of whether we like the movie or not, is whether we resent or do not mind being manipulated as the writer and director wished us to be. If someone watched this movie hoping for the suspense of a crime drama, they won't like it. If someone watched this hoping for dramatic acting as in the Oscar-winning roles of Streep or Neeson (I would have cited "Lamb" as his earliest and strongest), then they also would be disappointed. And if someone were watching this expecting something other than a presentation of daily life, then they would also be disappointed, because they would have found it flat, bland, even trite- until something dramatic, like the accident on Jacob's fateful date-- happens to jolt its members out of their routine and their complacency. That is what this movie is about.

I found myself agreeing with the entire gamut of the parents' reactions (which some viewers found "stupid"), but that is how parents (and even children) often behave in a crisis. I also found myself understanding both Jacob's and his sister's emotions. Jude didn't have many lines, but those she spoke were true and thought-provoking coming from a youngster of that age and maturity. One other crucial point is how the actors responded to each other as members of a family, and I found that they were not only well cast, but were all up to the challenge, delivering themselves quite honorably. This incident could have happened to any ordinary family, and there but for the grace of God, go I.

Of four ****, I rate three and a half.

Problem Child

[stamper · 7/10 · 22 December 2000]

Edward Furlong, somehow always manages to star in some good films and that probably is due to the fact that he chooses scripts in which he is something of a problem child or a social outcast. Anyway he always is a child that is far from normal and mostly a child out of luck. In T2 his mum is in the loony bin, in American History X he plays a full blown neo nazi, in this one he is wanted for murder. I could go on like this, but I do not want to bore you. Anyway the cast kind of speaks for itself, Liam Neeson, Meryl Streep plus Furlong, who is always good as the ‘problem child' or the outcast or the ‘strange one'. The names imply what this film is and fortunately not only they deliver a good performance, but so do all other actors and the director and on top of that the script is good too. No fast paced thriller this is though it is more or less of a simple crime movie that is somehow touchy (no not a drama). I enjoyed it and you might want to check it out too if you like these kind of movies, or as I maybe only because I like almost all of Furlong's movie I have seen.

7 out of 10

If you like unbelievable melodrama, you may like this

[bandw · 5/10 · 26 February 2006]

** Spoilers ** In this movie about a young boy who does not show up at home one cold evening and the ensuing mystery of why, there are plot holes galore: how did the kid get the car out of being stuck, why did he drive home, why did he leave the bloody evidence in the trunk, where did he go on that cold night after returning the car to his home, what kind of clothes did he take with him, what did he do for money, why was the father so immediately defensive about his son, what was the motivation for the kid's remaining totally silent and sullen upon his first meeting with his parents, were they willing to let some other kid take the rap, why did the people who threw a rock through the widow wait around long enough to get caught up with? I could go on.

The movie does hold your interest until you start asking yourself questions about what is going on.

This is the weakest performance I have ever seen Meryl Streep turn in, she just does not seem engaged. Liam Neeson gives it a go, but is defeated by the poor script. Julia Weldon is O.K. as the daughter, but she speaks with a philosophical maturity well beyond her twelve-something years. I thought Edward Furlong was effective in playing the sensitive and moody teen and Alfred Molina brought some spark to his portrayal of a bulldog attorney. But overall pretty much a waste of acting talent.

The unfortunate thing is that there was enough talent here to make this so much better if the script had just been tightened up.

Compelling theme is weakened with low production standards

[Pelrad · 19 April 1999]

The shortcomings of the United States' justice system are explored in "Before and After". A youth (Jacob) is fighting with his girlfriend and she accidentally falls on a jack which kills her. The family grapples with whether or not to tell the truth not only the courts but to their own lawyer and police officer who is a family friend. Is it morally right to tell the truth that the girl's death was nothing more than a mere accident and hope that it will be believed or should a story be made up in the hopes that Jacob will be let off since the police have no evidence. (The father, in the interests of protecting his son, wiped the jack clean of the blood).

We learn of course, that everyone is against the mother and son who want to just tell the truth, especially the lawyer who is interested more in getting Jacob off the hook, no matter how much of a story he has to invent, how many lies he has to tell, how many people's characters he has to besmirch. The moral structure behind the criminal justice system in the U.S. is uncovered as not one that seeks what is right or true but what kind of entertaining bi-polar battles between the defense and the prosecution can be unleashed in a furious game of words.

While the theme of the film is compelling, the production standards are low. This seems more like a made-for-TV movie. With big guns like Liam Neeson and Meryl Streep you'd expect better acting. While Streep's performance is okay, Neeson seems like not the best choice for this role. Also, the actor playing the second dark-haired lawyer seems too clownish for his role. Surprisingly, I found that the young actors were the strongest. The actors playing the two children, especially "Jacob" were extremely skilled.

too much message, whatever it might be, almost in spite of its good points

[Quinoa1984 · 6/10 · 21 June 2006]

Bits and pieces of this film by director Barbet Schroeder Before and After are all I had seen before I watched the film from start to finish tonight, maybe because it never seemed like something that was very much worthy to stick to for long on TV. Now after, it's never quite as successful as it aspires to almost in spite of what the cast is up to deliver. But what makes the film fall apart even when it reaches for grounded, dark family drama, is that there is an inherent 'message' being pushed with the material, and there is more potential for the dynamics of these characters than is mined. In fact, this could have been a very good film, bordering on excellent, if all the expectations that could come with a 'movie' version of such a realistic story had been subverted. As it is, Liam Neeson, Meryl Streep, and Edward Furlong do what they can with characters that border between two and two and a half dimensional characters (if that makes sense). They're all extremely competent and put power where it's needed in scenes. But the whole lot of it almost seems to a kind of 'meh' point, like an episode of Law and Order that goes more for the upper-middle class decay than the interest in the case itself of the murder committed by the teenage Furlong. No one is necessarily a 'bad' character, which ironically places some of what ends up occurring on screen after the first hour being bland and predictable. There are maybe two or three really well-done scenes in the whole film (i.e. when Neeson and Streep first visit Furlong in jail, with an impeccable silence from the child to the emotional parents), floating amid what could just as well be a TV movie trumped for Hollywood. It's also sad to report that a supporting actor like Alfred Molina is almost misused, which rarely every happens with his character-actor parts; compared to his best roles in other indie and blockbuster films the quality of 'ah, Molina's in this' lasts for maybe three minutes. Worth watching maybe once, though if you don't stick through it to the end it's not the end of the world- probably one of Shroeder's lesser films.

Streep and Neeson make this worth watching

[vincentlynch-moonoi · 7/10 · 19 February 2014]

I first watched this film several years ago on cable, and then watched it again tonight. I walked away from it this time being even more impressed -- overall -- with it as a drama, and with the much of the acting. And that's saying a lot because I very much dislike Liam Neeson, and usually ignore films in which he stars.

The story itself is rather depressing because it tells of the virtual disintegration of a family as a teenaged son is accused of murdering his girlfriend. The mother (Meryl Streep) is probably the parent acting most responsibly, although she cannot conceive that her son might actually murder someone (the "That's just not him" scenario that is all too common among modern parents -- and I say that as a long time teacher and school principal). The father is taking more the attitude that he's guilty, but we'll protect him no matter what -- literally destroying crucial evidence.

Streep and Neeson are superb here (although that doesn't mean you'll like or respect Neeson's character). We've come to expect perfection from every Streep role, and here she does not disappoint. Julia Weldon, as the young teen daughter, is also excellent; very believable.

As good as those performances are, there are two disappointments. Edward Furlong, as the son, well...as his later career has demonstrated, just doesn't have it to be a successful actor. His only real talent in this film seemed to be his ability to look mournful. He was almost painful to watch. And Alfred Molina...I've seen some performances of his that have been quite good...but not this one. I feel he totally misplayed the role of defense attorney.

I thought the movie was quite good, and the acting both good and poor, depending on the actor. But, twice is enough.

The innocents are not so innocents

[esteban1747 · 7/10 · 21 September 2003]

In several films dealing with murders and courts I have seen too many plots going directly to their end and leaving little of reality, i.e. somewhat artificially done. The present one is, in my opinion, different. Although the son of Ryan's family (Jacob) proved to be a normal guy and not guilty of what the whole community thought about it, the court finally sentenced him for a short period in prison. This was because He did not inform immediately to the justice of what happened to him with his girl-friend, and the way she accidentally killed herself. Another interesting aspect of the film is the good acting of Liam Neeson. He did it in such a real way that I thought he was really Jacob's father, a man loving his son but with too much impulses and low level of thinking. Meryl Streep was excellent as usual while Edward Furlong as Jacob did it also very well.

Why did the mother tell the truth

[siddharthsurve · 6/10 · 28 November 2019]

Why the hell she had to tell the truth. When the father is saying we can all stay quiet and wait. The boys 5 years and the fathers 1year could have been saved from punishment but the mother wanted to tell the truth doesn't make any sense

Gobble, Gobble

[masterjk2 · 4/10 · 30 June 2007]

How you could take Meryl Streep, Liam Nelson and Alfred Molina and only produce a half baked turkey like this is beyond me. But they did. The plot, as serpentine as it was, could have made sense. But it plays against human nature a good part of the time. Or maybe it was just the dialogue that wasn't human. I plugged along with this tired play only to see how it ended. It did. The idea that a 16 year old could get himself into so much trouble is not unbelievable. And after killing someone, even accidentally, one would probably become panic stricken. But I think it's human nature to try and hide the crime, not just leave all the clues and drive your family car home with blood in the trunk, including the mysterious bloody glove (where did that come from?) As for the father, he should stick with art. By trying to hide what he assumes is his son's crime, he only makes it worse. Meryl is a mother and she plays that part well. In fact she is the only believable character. Julia Weldon must be well connected because she can't act and that was a major drawback. The dichotomy of whether one should support family at all costs or seek the truth for all involved ( for the sake of society) is not new. As an artist, if he were from Bulgaria or some such country, Nelson's character might seem more believable. Everything is corrupt there. But here, we still assume that the innocent may get a fair shake, in spite of 6 years of the current regime's attempts to take away all rights of anyone they don't like. Never been a big fan of Furlong and his whining seems to be nearly continual in anything he does. Is there a casting call for whiners? There was a kernel of an idea in this movie, but without the proper care, it just became nutty.

Good Movie - Moral Dilemma

[geenam · 7/10 · 26 February 2014]

I recently saw this movie again after first seeing it in the movies when it first came out.

The premise of the story was good - what would you do if you suspected a family member of creating a terrible crime. Would you try and cover it up or would you turn the person in and tell the truth. These are some of the questions Liam Neeson and Meryl Streep as the parents have to contend with. I enjoy both of their acting and felt that Liam Neeson as the father was more realistic, while I felt that Meryl Streep seemed a little wishy washy. I didn't care for the son, played by Edward Furlong at all. I thought he was too blah and mopey and I didn't have much sympathy for him at all. There were also good performances by Alfred Molina as the defense attorney and Julia Wheldon, who played Liam and Meryl's daughter.

The movie moved along well and I felt that the ending was satisfactory. I was glad that the movie showed that people must take responsibility for their actions. All in all a good movie.

A reasonable but predictable melodrama with bad characters.

[filipemanuelneto · 4/10 · 15 October 2017]

In this film, a typical middle-class couple tries to cover up what they think is a homicide, after their son runs away without saying anything. Actors' work is consistent, but characters are so clichéd and annoying that it's hard to like them. Meryl Streep plays the good and naive mother, always in the shadow of her husband in a relationship that seems sexist and artificial. She is the portrait of the obedient housewife who does what the husband wants. I understand that the film is from the nineties, but even then there were other ideas about the role of women in the family. Liam Neeson is an impulsive and even violent father, whom its almost impossible to like, even though he shows that he likes his son and tries to protect him. Finally, Edward Furlong plays the teenager in revolt at who bad things happen, the idiot who dated a promiscuous girl who slept with anyone who appeared without pants in front of her. Ah, I almost forgot Alfred Molina, who played a lawyer who would be better off selling vacuum cleaners than in a courtroom. In short, it's a deep and engaging melodrama, but it makes the mistake of being totally predictable, like a TV movie.

Real Life versus You Life

[Richie-67-485852 · 10/10 · 24 February 2014]

If there ever was a movie where you could discuss the pro and con of what was said and done and by whom, this be the one to the textbook. What would you have done is the question and then choose a side and here we go. The arguments for or against what these characters did or didn't do are meaningful and full of depth and remain even closer to real life than one would admit. The opposing points of view and the beliefs behind them remain fascinating. Mother, daughter, father and son each had their own take on what should be done and why. If you don't care to join in and play the different roles, then sit back and let this movie have its way with your emotions. It will push and pull on you, love and hate will surface as well as right or wrong and good and bad. College classrooms would find this good for debate purposes bar none. Popcorn or sunflower seeds recommended to keep the fingers busy plus a refreshing drink. Enjoy

Believable and touching

[cat-60 · 6/10 · 25 October 1998]

By the end of this movie I was in love with Jacob Ryan (Furlong) a 16-year-old who is accused of murdering his thankless girlfriend. The movie is obviously geared in favor of Jacob who causes the death of Martha Taverner, a two-timing teen (Alison Folland) then suffers the consequenses. Jacob's concerned parents (Liam Neeson and Meryl Streep) are wonderful and convince you to love Jacob as much as they do despite his flat-out don't-care attitude. Even so, Edward manages to pull off a few heart wrenching scenes. Jacob's sister Jude (Julia Weldon) is indeed a loving young girl who cares about the truth as well as the welfare of her brother. Despite what critics say, I found the Ryan family most believable and even touching at times. The way they talk to each other and relate to one another is not unlike real life. However,there are holes in this story, almost leaving it open for a TV series or somesuch to fill in the gaps.

Too many sentimental violins, too little suspense. Maybe best suited for family viewing, because every edge or violence is stripped out of this who dunnit story.

[imseeg · 4/10 · 22 March 2019]

Great director. Great actors. Great plot about a son who gets accused of murder. What could go wrong? Well, there are just too many sentimental violins. Those dreary sentimental violins are suffocating every bit of suspense or true to life emotions in this picture. And it is not just these violins, but it is the whole rosey feel of this sugarcoated story, that began nagging me after 30 minutes.

It could have been a suspenseful movie. The plot is suited for it. But somehow this movie seems to be marketed to a specific Disney family audience. No violence whatsoever. No scary suspense whatsoever. Even when there should be some disturbing emotions in some scenes, there is just a bland performance by Meryl Streep. I adore Meryl Streep, but in this picture she isnt showing her ususal passion for acting.

I must applaud the ending, which I wont reveal. The story in itself is pretty good. The acting aint bad either, but it is just lacking punch. Therefore only suited for a " disney audience" who only can bare to watch a "murder" story when any sign of violence or horror is stripped out completely.