Pro Membership
Before and After
Inhouse product
Reviews & Ratings
-
DaRRen
09-08-2025The acting in this film was quite good - with the possible exception of the young actor who played Jacob. He was too wooden. The film also packs a lot of intrigue. It is definitely something that you will want to continue watching. It also weaves in a lot of family dynamics and conflict, which makes it a gripping drama.Here are some of the bad points. The lawyer and police were stereotypes. Just awful and one-dimensional. The people in the town were also one-dimensional. With the exception of one clerk at a hardware store, everyone turns against the family based on mere allegations of wrongdoing.Also, being a lawyer influences my opinion. Others might not have the same reaction. The parents behaved foolishly. First, they took matters into their own hands despite what both lawyers told them. Also, the second lawyer did not even interview his client (Jacob) despite the many times that he reminded the parents that he represented Jacob, not them. The entire resolution of the plot is completely unrealistic.I hate SPOILERS BUT WARNING: this last part contains SPOILERS. This case screamed for a plea agreement, but none was pursued. Judge knows it was an accident, but punishes him for not coming forward -- even though that is not a crime! No one discussed the relevance of his age to the legal proceeding, which was highly significant. He probably would not have received any jail time, and his record would have been expunged at 18. Also - there was no forensic evidence. Falling onto a jack would produce different wound patterns than being bludgeoned with one. Her appearance in the emergency room looked like a kid who was bludgeoned, but this is not true. So, the film is even more unrealistic. Also, it stereotypes lawyers way too much. Despite what you see on television and movies, lawyers do not rush to make wacky defenses. The diminished capacity argument was idiotic. No defense lawyer would have even gone there. Here's the more likely pattern in a case like this: interview the client, realize it was accidental, go to the prosecutor, discover that the evidence doesn't support the theory that it was murder, work out a deal so that no one gets jail time (first-time offenders, one a juvenile). The move barely reflects the way the legal system really works, and it perpetrates stupid stereotypes about that process. For all of these flaws, I can only give it a 3. You might not mind these things as a nonlawyer, but the unrealistic portrayal of the legal issues leads to implausible outcomes and crazy behavior by all of the characters, given the facts.
-
Danielle
09-08-2025The parent who tries to protect the child from the law? Or the parent who tries to protect the child by telling the truth to save the child from being condemned to a lifetime of inner guilt? A moral dilemma. What would you do? Excellent storytelling! Highly recommend.
-
Xenot
09-08-2025I rarely watch films more than once. I did watch this twice. If one is familiar with the cast of this movie, I don't think it's surprising that the acting was superb. The only sad thing was wondering where Edward Furlong's career was derailed. After viewing this film, I hope he gets his act together like Robert Downey Jr. He truly is a talent that I'd hate to see go to waste.
Meryl Streep stars as a respected, dedicated small town pediatrician whose life is thrown into turmoil when her teenage son Jacob disappears and is suspected of brutally murdering his girlfriend. When the boy returns home, she and her husband struggle to confront tragedy, protect their son, and survive as best they can.
