Body of Evidence

1993 "An act of love, or an act of murder?"
4.6| 1h41m| R| en| More Info
Released: 15 January 1993 Released
Producted By: Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://www.mgm.com/#/our-titles/226/Body-Of-Evidence
Synopsis

When an elderly millionaire is found dead with cocaine in his system, his will leaves $8 million to Rebecca Carlson, who was having an affair with him. District attorney Robert Garrett decides to prosecute Rebecca, arguing that she deliberately engaged in wild sex with the old man to overexcite him and lead to his premature death. Defense attorney Frank Dulaney defends Rebecca in court while getting sucked into a dangerous affair with her.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

2hotFeature one of my absolute favorites!
Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.
Tobias Burrows It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.
Married Baby Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?
Michael_Elliott Body of Evidence (1993) ** (out of 4)Rebecca Carlson (Madonna) is arrested for the murder of her lover. How did she kill him? She is accused by the prosecutor (Joe Mantegna) of slipping him some cocaine and using kinky sex to make his heart give out. Her lawyer Frank Dulaney (Willem Dafoe) takes the case and soon starts to fall for her sexual nature.After the huge success of BASIC INSTINCT there were all sorts of erotic thrillers being released. Some of them were quite good while others were downright horrible. Both COLOR OF NIGHT and BODY OF EVIDENCE are considered the worst of the bunch and there are good reasons why. Both films are rather poorly director and have screenplays that wouldn't cut it on a made-for-television film.As you watch the movie you're suddenly hitten with the fact that Madonna really can't act. Just take a look at the scene early on at the funeral where she's suppose to be heartbroken. The performance is just flat-out bad and it actually gets laughable at times. Even during the courtroom scenes Madonna basically just sits in a chair and gives a various of recation shots. There's just nothing here. Well, she at least knows how to take her clothes off and show off some sexuality but the direction keeps the film from ever becoming erotic.The screenplay is really all over the place and rarely does it make much sense. Heck, we hear about the murder and then within minutes we're already at the trial. We never fully get to know any of the characters and the various twists and turns are all rather bland. The film is desperately trying to be another BASIC INSTINCT but its just not happening and in the end the film just comes across as a really cheap wannabe that lacks any drama or sexuality.With that all being said, take a look at this cast! Yes, Madonna gets the lead because her sexuality was what was meant to sell the picture. Then you've got Dafoe and Mantegna playing the layers. Then you've got Julianne Moore playing Dafoe's wife. Tehre's Anne Archer in the role of the dead man's secretary. It doesn't stop there because you also get character actor Charles Hallahan and Frank Langella comes out of nowhere for his rather strange role. Why on Earth did all of these people sign on for this?
Anna Smith Hei, I gave 6 because the script was not that great, as a thriller it could have had a better suspense. But the acting work and directing was on the level. There is nothing wrong with Madonnas acting in this film. And she looks great too. It is a typical "erotic thriller" and not of the worst kind at all. It is just an average representative of the genre and as such, on a stronger side. The script has large plot holes like most erotic thrillers but most of the people watch it to see Madonna and men watch it for Madonna getting her clothes off, isn't it. I think Madonna and her lawyer had a good on-screen chemistry and it was a fully valid chill-out film to watch. This review is written by a heterosexual woman. I do not fancy Madonna, but I like her persona and her acting and I think she was good in this film.
PeterMitchell-506-564364 I saw this twice at the cinema, the second time with my Dad. I liked the movie that much. The premise was fun. Madonna, where we're granted a look at her goodies at the start, is playing on a videotape, having sex with a 63 year old man. Then we cut over to the big brass bed where the deceased codger, Andrew Marsh, lies, very much dead, the thinnest trace of a smile on his face. Enter Dafoe on the case (another asset to the film-that raspberry award nomination was bogus) who takes Madonna as on a client, and that's not all, as seen in awesomely hot scenes with class, later on the film, that rival Basic Instict's. This film has a lot of style. Madonna lives on a two story house, rested on stilts on the river. The setting for this movie is a nice choice. Oregan of all places. Another of Marshes's loves, his secretary, Anne Braslow (Anne Archer, again undeserved of a raspberry) is Madonna's rival here, really trying to stick the knife in her. We see the late Andrew, favored Madonna much more, as proved in the will of 8 million. Some lines of dialogue in this flick are classic. I think I read the second draft of Brad Mirman's script, that I liked a lot, that varies a lot from the finished project, big chunks of dialogue removed in the courtroom scenes, replaced with smaller amounts. Bob Garrett, (Joe Mantegna) is Anne Archer's lawyer, who really has it in for Madonna. I wonder if jealousy plays a part here. Mantegna are Dafoe are rival competitors, old compadaries. This actor here is the most undeserving of a raspberry. This film was when Madonna actually started acting. Here, I thought she was quite good. She was even better in that later flick, "Dangerous Game' a couple of years on, and then that role in Evita, her acting pinnacle, that truly made us see what this versatile talent is capable of, to all those envious and hypocritical jerks out there. The line near the start, where the son asks his father (Dafoe) "Can you really screw someone to death?" was a bold move on the kid's part on the kid's part. Dafoe's answer is partly funny you'll find if you watch the flick. Body of Evidence is been panned by a lot of people. It's continuity is great. Sex. Long Courtroom scene. Even more sex. Courtroom scene. And after all, this whole case is proved in intent, with so much of the evidence pointed at Madonna. Another few witnesses put on the stand are 60 plus, men, ex-lovers of Madonna, where her sessions of sex were strenous, some of them involving domanatrix, like being handcuffed to be4d rails, as our poor Andrew, and having such gadgets like nipple clamps attached, that Bob Garrett has a worldly knowledge of. After all he's from L.A. One ex-lover (Frank Langella) is forced to leave the courtroom as Madonna had found him in bed with another guy. Thundershock, hey? One actress who escaped a raspberry, was Julianne Moore who went onto become one of Hollywood's greatest and respected actresses. She's hot here, in the first erotic scene to the movie with Dafoe, his thrusting rumps, practically hitting us in the face. She compliments him after they both climax, Moore saying "You're great when you get a new case". Unfortunately gossip spreads, and Moore discovers Dafoe's infidelity, leaving him in the doghouse. But she's forgiving at the end, when true justice is served in a great dramatic climax. I loved it when Moore and Madonna were in the ladies, and Moore slaps her, after Madonna says "Wish me luck". I so wanted to believe Madonna was innocent, but I guess this was how it was almost meant to play out. BOE is a great stylish thriller, a good day at the movies. It's got actors we love, some good lashings of sex, (a sexier movie than Basic Instinct, one scene even involving hot wax) involving courtroom scenes, some comedy scenes and Madonna's, you know what. This just happens to be one of those movies that got the short end of the stick.
itamarscomix Those three words seem to run through most of the reviews for this title, yet still it maintains its very low 4.1 average rating. It's probably one of the best of the exploitative, sleazy erotic thrillers of the 90's. That's not high praise, but it also places it quite far away from the worst films ever made.The weakest link in the film - and maybe the one responsible for much of its bad reputation is Madonna. Having tried her might at several mediocre comedies, Madonna chose this thriller as her first serious role, and she doesn't quite make it. Her acting isn't quite horrible - but she's clearly trying to channel the femme fatales of the classic Film Noirs, and placing herself in the same category as the likes of Barbara Stanwyck, Marlene Dietrich and Kim Novak, she's nowhere near good enough. It's also not as good as her previous femme fatale role on Dick Tracy, which was just self-aware and campy enough to work. But Body of Evidence takes itself too seriously for Madonna's performance to pass. Surprisingly, she isn't even good enough at being sensual and seductive, making the sexual scenes quite awkward (as lovely as it is to see so much of Madonna's skin, that is).But surprisingly, most of the other scenes work quite well. Willem Dafoe and Joe Mantegna are good enough as the rival lawyers to make the courtroom scenes very effective, and as a courtroom drama alone (paying as little mind as possible to Madonna's scenes) it's well written, well acted and quite entertaining. Julianne Moore is good in her few short scenes as Dafoe's wife, and much of the supporting cast is also solid. All of these make it an entertaining enough thriller, filled to the brim with clichés but still managing to hold a little punch at the end. It's by no means a great film but it's also not that bad.