Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

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

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Pierce Brosnan is a college professor who teaches a creative writing course that requires students to actually write a plausible murder scenario. A complication is that the prof himself actually wrote a book implicating a friend in a murder, for which his friend is found guilty and sent to prison. There is a twist at the very end of this really good-cinema quality-movie that has had only passing reference here among the User reviews, so this critique seeks to explore that twist in more detail.Spoiler A number of reviewers have mentioned the twist at the end without specifying whether they are alluding to the conventional penultimate twist-the one we never suspected-or the finale in the last 30 seconds leading up to the credits.One reviewer found this the same device as in Chicago Joe and the Show Girl, but in fact that movie was content to keep jiggling the fourth wall. Murder101 does not do that until the last moment, where the wall is not merely jiggled but sort of turned into the conceptual equivalent of a time-loop. It seems the outer movie, the one we are watching on our screens, is but a tableaux to present a movie-in-the-making, a movie that lo and behold was based on a screenplay developed from the murder-assignment of one of the Prof's students, who plays an integral part in the piece himself.I can't think of this as nothing so much as a cinematic analogue of Escher's mutually drawing hands. Everyone character in the movie is in fact also an actor playing... their own part, and to make that clear at the close, the dolly-shot backwards reveals not merely the set boom-mike, but some of the 'dead' victims as very well and alive.This leads to a furious amount of re-thinking, after the movie, of everything presupposed, including plot-'holes' (eg. It had bothered me that the clever student had a cast-iron alibi-he was giving a presentation, at the time of Francesca's death, so the Prof had let off his suspicion; so why did he re-adopt his suspicion later on?), yet are these holes in the movie itself? Or are they defects in the self-referencing 'student's' self-referencing assignment-turned-movie script?And it would explain something that bothered me: the student had written an absolutely STELLAR assignment; probably the most block-buster assignment any undergrad had ever written anywhere, ever. I was expecting with its impending cover-page reveal to see an "A+". Why only an "A"? Because a few... plot-holes?

"Murder 101" is by far one of Pierce Brosnan's best performances in an almost tailored role for his Irish personality. I think I haven't seen him in a better movie before he played James Bond in 1995. Brosnan plays a writer who teaches how to write mystery stories. He's a little crazy about perfection in his novels and is very interesting to listen to when he gives writing lessons to his classes. I love Brosnan's performances and hope he could get back to this kind of role after he gives up the Bond role.*SPOILERS*"Murder 101" tells the story of mystery writer Charles Lattimore (Pierce Brosnan) who recently wrote a highly successful novel about the true story of Timothy Ryder (J. Kenneth Campbell) who murdered his wife. Lattimore spent time with Ryder to understand his story and didn't believe that Ryder was guilty. But success was more important than friendship for Lattimore as he betrayed Ryder and wrote that he killed his wife. Lattimore is hunted by the betrayal he did to his friend and finds out that the murders occurring on campus where he works are destined to frame him. So he thinks Ryder is setting him up with a student from Lattimore's class (Raphael Sbarge). Lattimore tries to prove his innocence with the help of his ex-wife (Dey Young) and settle the score with Ryder before things get worst.This is a great TV-movie who could of been successful in theaters. It's a shame that it was broadcast on TV instead. It really is a wonderfully written movie that shows a difference between reality and fiction. Performances by Dey Young and Raphael Sbarge are excellent and make this movie shine on your TV. Rent it. I rate it 9/10.

This movie has a professor teaching students how to write a good mystery story, yet it doesn't play fair with its audience. SPOILER MAYBE. When I first saw this movie, I could tell halfway through that it wasn't playing fair, so I was able to figure out who the killer was, someone you not only wouldn't suspect but someone you shouldn't have suspected. Someone gets murdered in the movie, but it doesn't accomplish the killer's purpose, whereas killing someone else would have. There are also implausible incidents where the killer has opportunity or when they don't really have time to show up when they do. Also, the professor behaves stupidly when first confronted with his dilemma. Finding a body does not automatically make you the prime suspect. All in all, a badly written plot and the characters are not interesting enough to make up for it.

I purchased this title with some apprehension; TV movies are not high on my 'Must See' list. I must admit that I was pleasantly surprised after viewing this little-known gem! It has a little bit of everything: plot twists, suspense, action, sex, and a roughly bearded Brosnan (for Brosnan fans)!