The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Excellent characters with emotional depth. My wife, daughter and granddaughter all enjoyed it...and me, too! Very good movie! You won't be disappointed.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I quite enjoyed this movie. There have been complaints about plot holes, most of which are not really holes at all. My explanation follows: (I've put the "holes" in quotes.)"I didn't understand why Crawford fired the pistol through the window. What was the purpose of that and didn't this provide ballistic evidence when those bullets were retrieved?"The point of shooting through the window, (after he heard the voice of the landscaper) was to create an situation requiring the calling of the police."Crawford had to check the make of the Nunally's sidearm well in advance to purchase an identical pistol." It's not that difficult to find out what sort of guns cops carry. He had undoubtedly used a private investigator to find out that:(a) his wife was cheating (b) who she was cheating with (c) find out all he can about the guy she was cheating withHe had been in their room the day of the shooting. It's not a stretch to assume he might have been there on an earlier occasion, and thus could find out exactly what kind of gun the cop carries."Is it possible that Nunally might have noticed a difference between his personal sidearm (nicks, scratches, general feel) and the "identical" replacement weapon?"The gun was in a holster. When he picks it up, it is in the holster. Most of the gun is concealed in that holster, with only the butt exposed. He sees what he expects to see. He would have no reason to expect that it is not his gun."Why didn't Nunally (or anyone else) think it unusual that the murder weapon was the exact same pistol that he himself carried?"Glocks are popular."How did Crawford know that his wife would not have divulged her identity to Nunally at some point in their liaison?"He didn't. This could be considered a hole."Assuming that the only ballistic evidence was in the wife's head, how could Crawford know in advance of the shooting that it would not simply pass thru, at such close range, or that the bullet could not be surgically removed or that his wife would not have died from the shooting? Any would provide ballistic evidence that Nunally's pistol was the murder weapon."They would have no reason to compare the bullet to Nunally's pistol. He did take a gamble on this, which he ultimately lost."The big, big hole. How did Crawford know that Nunally would be the officer arriving on the scene? Is he the only homicide detective in town? It all falls apart if anyone else shows up."Nunally wasn't just a detective. He was a hostage negotiator. This position requires additional training/skill. He undoubtedly discovered this fact when he had him investigated. This is why he shot through the windows, to create what would have been perceived as a "hostage situation"."Raised by Gosling, but unanswered in the plot, why did Crawford remove his wife from life support when he could have simply left the country for good as a free man."He erroneously believed he was home-free, after having been acquitted.Another reviewer posited the following:1) A man and a woman have an affair, and never get each other's last names. One happens to be a police hostage negotiator who happens to show up when the woman he's been seeing has been murdered.He doesn't "happen" to show up. He is brought to the scene because of a potential hostage situation. Prior to Nunnaly seeing the body, the police do not know that she has been murdered.2) There are two guns on the scene when the body is discovered by police. For the entire length of the movie the investigators never think to check out one of those guns to see if it's the murder weapon.This is because one of those two guns belongs to the cop. They didn't think of the switch. They're not all Columbos.3) The district attorney's office is given a single long weekend to come up with extra evidence in an attempted murder case when a witness is compromised. Anyone who's ever been involved in any aspect of a real murder case knows how laughable this is.I can't argue this one, since I'm not familiar with California law. I would imagine, though, that if you have no admissible evidence in a case, the case might well go south.4) A hospital agrees to a man's Do Not Resuscitate request for his wife the day after the man has been acquitted for attempting to murder her. No one intervenes on behalf of the wife, no family, no friends, no victim's advocates, no one.We don't know if there was any family. The hospital adjudged her case as hopeless. He might also have had some power of attorney for medical decisions.5) A man who has planned out a brilliant scheme for getting away with murder, covering every last detail with psychotic foresight, neglects to read the fine print in the Double Jeopardy laws and carelessly re-implicates himself.The reviewer is correct on this one. It is difficult to imagine that he would not be aware of this. I knew, as soon as he pulled the plug on her, that this would be his undoing.One reviewer complained that the double jeopardy law would have protected him. That is not the case. Attempted murder and murder are two different sections of law, with different statute numbers. When the wife died, a different charge applied, and he could be retried.Just my $0.02.

On the whole Fracture feels very...okay - I didn't really enjoy it, but equally it has some interesting characters and dialogue to lift it above the realms of being thoroughly average. Worth a watch if you have plenty of time on your hands.

An attorney, intent on climbing the career ladder toward success, finds an unlikely opponent in a manipulative criminal he is trying to prosecute. Fracture benefits directly from 2 amazing perfomances from Ryan Gosling and Sir Anthony Hopkins when on the same time it's an edge of your seat crime thriller with lots of twists and turns and with some great direction too alongside an insane and well made soundtrack. The motivations and the characters also become more clear as the film goes with the biggest praise going to Gosling since when we meet him his cocky and arrogant and as the movie goes on and on he gets more and more into the case and he wants to prove that Hopkins did in fact killed his wife as for Hopkins himself? it's like watching Hannibal once again over and over again. Overall an amazing cinematic experience and one that is Underrated on so many levels. (10/10)

Reasonably interesting, but flawed, courtroom-drama.Engaging plot, though it is far from watertight. There are several holes, not least in the murderer's grand plan, in the way the Deputy District Attorney eventually unravels it and in how he ultimately puts the evidence together to prosecute him. Plus the ending can be seen a mile off - not the exact details, but the broader nature of it.Anthony Hopkins seems to be going through the motions in his role. It's as if he is trying to recreate Hannibal Lecter, and doing it half-heartedly. His accent is also quite perplexing, as it seems to change with each scene. I think he was supposed to be Irish, but the accent seems to come and go.Ryan Gosling is reasonably solid in his role. Good support from Rosamund Pike and David Strathairn.