Am I a stupid or what? I didn't get a thing about the movie played by kevin spacey and kate winslet in which she found out that he really wasn't a murder but then he was..? Also the money sent to his wife where it came from? And his lawyer was a part of it or not? Anybody would explain it to me please? I'll appreciate it.
2006-11-28 23:12:11 · 7 answers · asked by Tana Umaga 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
He did not kill her! She committed suicide because she was diagnosed with a terminal illness and didn't have much time to live. They were part of a group against the death penalty and they wanted to show that an innocent man could be put to death for a crime he didn't commit. The money was for the story. The woman investigating the story tried to rush the tape proving his innocence to the authorities before they put him to death and she was too late. It was all a well laid out plan to prove that our justice system is flawed.
2006-11-28 23:24:39 · answer #1 · answered by Roll'n Bluntz 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I thought that was a complete mess of a movie with a terrible performance from Kate Winslet. Don't bother trying to understand it, let it rot in the bargain bins at Blockbuster where it belongs.
2006-11-28 23:18:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
THIS MOVIE WAS DONE TO EXPLAIN HOW PEOPLE CAN MANIPULATE THE SYSTEM. KEVIN SPACEY ALLOWED HIMSELF TO BE PLACED IN THE SITUATION AND LET THE CARDS FALL AS THEY DID. HE GIVES KATE WINSLET JUST ENOUGH INFORMATION SO THAT SHE GETS THE IDEA-THIS DEATH WAS AN ASSISTED SUICIDE-AND THAT SHE TRIES TO SAVE HIS LIFE. WHAT SHE DOESN'T REALIZE UNTIL LATER IS THAT HE PLANNED IT ALL. WHILE HE DIDN'T KILL HER, HE DID NOTHING TO ASSIST HER. SHE WAS DYING AND WANTED TO MAKE A STATEMENT ABOUT CAPITOL PUNISHMENT.
2006-11-29 01:50:57 · answer #3 · answered by rita 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
basically it was a movie that was meant to send the message that there are some instances that the system does send innocent people to prison or sentenced to death . but the movie had such a bizarre twist because he really was not innocent if in fact he was aware of the charade from the start..still it was a interesting movie
2006-11-29 01:26:43 · answer #4 · answered by cajun-queen 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
properly definite he replaced into prepared to die to tutor that factor.....that's the rationalization he allowed himself to seem in the video. If he wasnt in the video, then how could they tutor that the dying penalty does particularly kill harmless human beings. :particularly.....if i bear in mind properly......the video that replaced into shown to the clicking and international......wasnt with him. That video replaced into in basic terms of her committing suicide.The video with him in it replaced into in basic terms for the reporter's piece of recommendations because it replaced into categorised "Off the record". He did that for her as to assert don't experience in charge, you probably did no longer fail me. or maybe him being in charge as an adjunct i think, NO way does he get the dying penalty that's what that's all approximately.
2016-12-13 16:35:50 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He was innocent. The girl from his class set him up. She told the police that he raped her. That's why the girl scratched him when they were doing 'it' in the bathroom, so that it looked like it was a struggle....
2006-11-28 23:58:14 · answer #6 · answered by Motti _Shish 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes...he was the murderer...but he only killed her because she was dying anyway.....i absolutely love the movie.....!!!
2006-11-28 23:14:45 · answer #7 · answered by METALLICAna 2 · 0⤊ 4⤋