marieltrokan Good attracts evil. Evil attracts good. The definition of good, in this instance, is the ability to attract an opposite. The definition of evil is the same. Good is the ability to not destroy. Evil is the ability to destroy. The ability to protect is the ability to attract an opposite. The ability to destroy is the ability to attract an opposite. Protection attracts an opposite. Destruction attracts an opposite. Protection attracts destruction. Destruction attracts protection. Attraction is ability. Protection is the ability of destruction. Destruction is the ability of protection. Ability is purpose. The purpose of destruction is protection. The purpose of protection is destruction.Destruction is inability - the lack of purpose. The lack of purpose is the purpose of protection. Purpose is the purpose of the lack of purpose.No purpose is the purpose of purpose. The purpose of purpose is no purpose. No purpose is inertness. Inertness is the purpose of purpose. The purpose of purpose is inertness.The purpose of purpose is the same as the inertness of inertness. The inertness of inertness is inertness.Inert inertness is incapacity that's incapacity - the incapacity of incapacity is inert.Inertness is balance. But balance is the incapacity of incapacity. The incapacity of incapacity is the capacity of capacity. The capacity of capacity is an unmotivated capacity. Balance is an unmotivated ability - a motivated inability.The true meaning of order, or balance is when an inability to do something possesses reason. If an inability has no reason, an inability isn't possible.All weaknesses, all limitations and all hardships in reality are only possible because they've been given power.All power in the universe can only be used to create weakness

jessegehrig This movie no good, grammar defies it. I mean it's not terrible, but it sucks to watch this movie. I feel like Rebecca DeMornay has been shamefully misused by the film industry, most women in film have been shamefully misused, but with Rebecca DeMornay in her eyes you can see that she knows it, she knows she got screwed. OK movie tries to be steamy erotic thriller but never actually commits- movie tries to be suspenseful but instead is only slow and jerky. No one is offensive with their acting, the directing is passable, cinematography is quality work as is editing, professional grade production value, story sucks is all, story is crap. A lifeless bloodless narrative that fails primarily for lack of characters- oh its got characters, but they are nothing people who feel nothing and go nowhere and never ask why. Needs more tittie and a car chase?

MovieGuy109 Did I love the Sidney Lumet film Guilty as Sin? No. Did I enjoy it? You bet. Compared to Lumet's previous films like 12 Angry Men or The Verdict, it's weak, but as entertainment it works. Lumet is always making us question the nature of his characters, are they good or evil? Are they guilty? There's no denying that Lumet is a master of creating questions and letting us slowly receive the answers. The acting is serviceable, Johnson is good as a woman-killing madman, DiMurray makes the grade as a lawyer that loves the smell of victory. Is the dialouge masterful? No. Just like the whole film, it just makes the grade; no more, no less. Yet when you contrast this film with other killer-oriented films, it's honorable.

ShootingShark Jennifer Haines is a top-notch defence lawyer who takes on the case of David Greenhill, a lothario accused of murdering his rich wife. Greenhill used his attorney-client privilege to smugly confess not only to this murder, but to those of other wealthy women. Haines decides to risk her career by planting false evidence to prove Greenhill's guilt ...Courtroom thrillers are a dime a dozen, and it's very unusual to find one as original as this - it supplants lots of clichés, focuses on the bare minimum of characters and comes up with lots of great ideas, which is why it entertains so much. It's styled much more like an old Hitchcock picture, with an intelligent yet vulnerable female lead and a suave but psychotic male. DeMornay is terrific and Johnson was made for this part, and they have tremendous intensity together on-screen, even though Haines has only fear and revulsion for Greenhill. The movie's prime asset is Larry Cohen's excellent script, with lots of snappy dialogue ("You know what the problem with committing perfect murders is - you can't tell anybody."), and oodles of interesting plot twists - Greenhill picks out his defender before perpetrating his crime, Haines deliberately tries to lose her case (what American lawyer would ever do that), Greenhill produces evidence both for and against himself and connecting him to Haines - his ingenuity is boundless. There is a great simple score by Howard Shore, and Andrzej Bartkowiak's photography is crisp and polished, with lots of elegant simple two-shots of the leads, often with one in profile whispering in the other's ear. A fine thriller, well directed by old pro Lumet, which does what any good crime story should do - grab your attention and keep you guessing.