Waste of time

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

To me there's really only one thing a filmmaker/writer should never ever do. They can use all sorts of little cheats and suspend the laws of physics for stylistic effect as much as they want, but when they use those same cheats to resolve the main mystery of the plot, then that's just too stupid. To avoid giving too much detail I'll use a hypothetical example: Suppose you're watching a suspense film and the heroine is up against the wall with killers all around her. They're armed, she isn't. She has no help and no way out, and the situation has been tensely evolving to this point for two hours. Then she just magically turns invisible and flies away with no explanation for how, when, or why she suddenly developed the ability to fly and turn invisible. The end. Good film? No. A terrible cheat. And 1st To Die is just that way. The plot's mystery is resolved by a sudden revelation that someone can do something that's impossible. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.Any idiot can write a good mystery if you don't have to explain how it worked within the laws of physics. Imagine the old "locked room mystery" where the victim has been killed in a room that has been locked from the inside, so how did the killer do it? If the answer is that the killer suddenly developed the ability to pass through brick walls without disturbing them, then it's not a very good mystery, is it?

If you are a James Patterson fan you will probably not have a problem with the film; if you are more film and visual oriented, too many scenes will remind you of Hitchcock, and also "Basic Instinct"(even the soundtrack is exactly the same, and the initial camera angles over the San Francisco coast are TOO similar).Nicholas Jenks is possibly the narcissistic killer. Angie Everhart is surprisingly good as his wife.Tracy Pollan is not bad, trying a bit too hard; Megan Gallagher and Pam Grier are good, respectively, as the D.A. and County Medical Examiner. Carly Pope as a cub reporter is way over the top. Okay, they needed a younger cast member who could relate to the victims, but she is given way too much screen time. Also I seriously doubt that when there is a brutal homicide, a curious person can enter the hotel room, pretending to deliver flowers.Overall a little too contrived for audiences expecting more in this genre. 6/10

My wife wanted me to get this off Netflix on a recommendation.Immediately I had a feeling it had been a TV movie. This must have been a very tedious experience watching this weak movie with commercials! Plus it was rate R for some reason. Why if it was on network TV?Only Robert Patrick does a reasonable job as the villain. Even the reliable Pam Grier couldn't bring much to her role as the coroner. Tracy Pollan is really a subpar actress. Only the slight plot twists made this any small reason to waste 2 and half hours viewing this. Mitch Pileggi was very credible and Gil Bellows very disappointing. Don't was any time on this movie. There are so many other good movies to rent or purchase.

Another wonderful Patterson book made into an incredibly awful movie. If the big budget movies don't work then why make a low budget made for t.v. movie that's 10 times worse! I am desperate for a good movie that will do ONE of his books justice!