Better Late Then Never

Absolutely brilliant

I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Blistering performances.

a story about success. not the most inspired, far to be the worst . the presence of Michael Douglas and Jesse Metcalfe , the fight for the noble purpose, the last surprise, the love story are reasonable ingredients for a sort of crime who reminds better examples of genre. so, far to be awful.

Jesse Metcalfe plays C.J. Nicholas, a young and hungry-for-excitement journalist who frames himself for murder in order to expose the evidence-tampering and phony convictions by the corrupt D.A.of Shreveport, LA. Amber Tamblyn plays Ella Crystal, the pretty young Assistant D.A. who suddenly and rather unconvincingly falls in love with Nicholas and enters into a fall-on-her-sword relationship with him. While I'm not personally a huge fan of Michael Douglas's too-cool-for-words acting style, his fans will probably enjoy his performance as the D.A.BEYOND a REASONABLE DOUBT is, of course, a remake of a somewhat better 1956 film by the same title. This version is probably worth seeing if you're a not-too-picky legal thriller fan. It's generally well-filmed and keeps your attention with some nice courtroom drama: Sharon London is a standout here as Judge Sheppard. On further scrutiny, however, it's all quite contrived, and the supposedly big twist at the end is awful sudden and tacked-on.SEMI-SPOILER ALERT! In the end, BRD is a poor rip-off of a much, much better film from 1996, PRIMAL FEAR.

DA Mark Hunter (Michael Douglas) has an impressive record. Maybe it's too impressive. C.J. Nicholas (Jesse Metcalfe) is a young reporter trying to investigate the DA. He's sleeping with assistant DA Ella Crystal (Amber Tamblyn), and decides on a sting to set up Hunter. He sets up some evidence to lure Hunter to frame him for a murder. Hunter smells a set up and kills CJ's friend Corey Finley (Joel David Moore) who was holding the evidence to vindicate him.The problem with this movie is that it's so illogical. I'm not sure any of the evidence would actually vindicate CJ. And it seems more reasonable to have multiple copies leaving at least one with his lawyer. It was going alright until Corey Finley driving like a maniac. It makes no sense. In fact, it was REALLY REALLY stupid. It's an excuse to have a car chase to artificially jack up the excitement. The problem is that it did the exact opposite and jack up the stupidity.It's a remake of Fritz Lang's 1956 movie. I've never seen the original. I can guess with older technology, the story could be more convincing. If they lost a document back then, they could really lose a document. It occurs to me that the best evidence for his innocence is a rock solid alibi. I doubt the CD held any such alibi.While Jesse Metcalfe and Amber Tamblyn have been lambasted here, I'm not willing to pile on any of the blame. They do a decent job. It's not their fault that the story is written with so many plot holes.

I must mention I like Law and am a fan of thrillers and courtroom movies and novels. I did not see the original version. Also, I have seen most of the movies directed by Peter Hyams and like them all (some more than other, but I really like "Timecop", for example. He is very good at thrillers). I was about to start the Law degree in my town, but finally, decided to start another, in fact. The movie has a very adequate lenght. It is quite short, which makes it enjoyable and amusing. The pace is very good for a dramatic intriguing thriller with a bit of action. Moreover, it contains a few twists that make it worth watching and interesting. Peter Hyams really knows how to direct thrillers of almost all kinds. This movie is very focused on its plot more than in the character development. The cast is good. The most well-known and only famous is Michael Douglas (the best actor in the movie). He delivered a deep and believable performance as a rogue prosecutor. Maybe, he is not the most versatile actor, but he is always believable and has a solid career. The protagonist is played by Jesse Metcalfe, whose career is not so good. This time, he delivered a correct performance as a young reporter struggling to proof the prosecutor is rogue. Joel David Moore, a young quite unknown actor, is also correct as his best friend. Amber Tamblyn has worked in well-known movies even though she is not famous at all. She is more than good as the female sentimental partner of the main character. Moreover, the character has a lot of relevance for the plot. The sceneography is nothing special, the typical for a courtroom thriller in a typical U.S. town. The problem with the movie is that something relevant happens at a given moment and is misunderstood like it were nothing relevant. This is what I disliked the most about the movie, apart from the main actor (he is not bad, but he should have done it better taking into account he is the head character. Maybe, this has been a casting error). In conclusion, Michael Douglas and the plot itself are the strenghts in the movie whereas the main actor's performance and the plothole I am afraid I cannot explain are its defects. Anyway, this is a very enjoyable and solid thriller. I specially recommend it to those that like the courtroom subgenre and both Hyams' and Douglas' fans. 8.