BODY OF EVIDENCE
A film review by James Berardinelli
Copyright 1993 James Berardinelli
Running Length: 1:39 Rated: R (Nudity, sexual situations, language, mature themes)
Starring: Madonna, Willem Dafoe, Joe Mantegna, Anne Archer Director: Uli Edel Producer: Dino DeLaurentiis Screenplay: Brad Mirman Music: Graeme Revell Released by MGM
The central question of BODY OF EVIDENCE is whether Rebecca Carlson (Madonna) used her body as a deadly weapon. Her latest paramour, a millionaire who has willed 8 million dollars to her, dies of a heart attack. District Attorney Robert Garrett (Joe Mantegna) believes that Rebecca killed him with sex, knowing that he had a weak heart and intentionally driving him over the brink so that she could get the money. It's the job of lawyer Frank Dulaney (Willem Dafoe) to prove that she is innocent. Even though he has doubts about his client's innocence, he nevertheless becomes involved with her in a sadomasochistic relationship.
For those who have a desire to see Madonna in the altogether, the $6.00 spent on a ticket for BODY OF EVIDENCE is far less than the cost of her book SEX. Other than that, however, there is no reason why a thinking, rational human being would subject him/herself to this embarrassing excuse for a motion picture.
The first clue that this is a bad movie comes with the initial lines of dialogue, which are as stilted as they are dumb. Things don't get better as the movie progresses. There is one especially painful exchange between Carlson and Dulaney where Rebecca defends sex, saying things like, "They've taken something good between two people in love and made it dirty." She goes on to condemn society's puritanical, hypocritical values in a scene custom-designed to allow Madonna to make a speech in her own real-life self-defense.
It goes without saying that there's a lot of gratuitous nudity and sex in this film. That is, after all, the kind of movie it's billed as. Madonna's isn't the only naked body that parades across the screen. Dafoe has his moments, as do Julianne Moore (who plays Sharon Dulaney, Frank's wife), and a body double for Anne Archer (Joanne Braslow, the dead man's secretary). Oddly enough, however, the sex scenes generate more boredom than heat. There is no chemistry between Madonna and Dafoe and the direction by Uli Edel is pedestrian.
Buried beneath the exploitation is an inane thriller that delivers more yawns than thrills. Putting aside the fact that it's completely implausible, there's no suspense. Whether Rebecca did it or not becomes irrelevant. The courtroom scenes that probe the "burning issues" of the film are plodding, replete with BODY OF EVIDENCE's characteristically silly dialogue.
The less said about Madonna's acting, the better. As a sex symbol, she leaves something to be desired as well. Her character is constantly referred to as "beautiful," the kind of woman a man would alter his will for, yet the lighting and makeup people behind the scenes at BODY OF EVIDENCE have gone out of their way to show her as a plain, rather unappealing person.
Most of the other actors seem to have taken their cues from Madonna. It's been a long time since Joe Mantegna and Willem Dafoe have turned in such limp performances. Anne Archer, who has never shown great range, isn't any better. The only one who acts like he wasn't completely bored by the proceedings is Frank Langella.
Comparisons to BASIC INSTINCT are inevitable. However uninspired the Paul Verhoeven sex-and-blood-fest may have been, it's superior to this effort. There were a few genuine performances turned in for the 1992 thriller, coupled with a plot that, hard as it was to believe, is more credible than that of BODY OF EVIDENCE.
Speaking of BASIC INSTINCT, this film shares another trait with it--the lack of a likable protagonist. Willem Dafoe's character is sleazy and despicable--a lawyer who, by his own admission, defends the mostly-guilty and who, with little provocation, becomes involved in a highly-unethical extra-marital relationship with a client.
In general, thrillers are one of the easiest classes of movies to do poorly and one of the hardest to do well. BODY OF EVIDENCE takes the easy road, and ends up being a shambles from the start. It's not just a poor effort, it's unforgivable.
Rating: 3.8 (D-, *)
- James Berardinelli (blake7@cc.bellcore.com)
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews