The facts: journalist Zenia Arden is missing, her abandoned car is found with three pints of her blood splattered inside, and one of her fingers severed from her body is found close to the ... See full summary »
Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends.
If your account is linked with Facebook and you have turned on sharing, this will show up in your activity feed. If not, you can turn on sharing
here
.
The facts: journalist Zenia Arden is missing, her abandoned car is found with three pints of her blood splattered inside, and one of her fingers severed from her body is found close to the car. From these facts, the authorities believe there is no way she could have survived what looks to be a brutal slaying. Henry Kelly, her police officer secret boyfriend, believes he will be implicated as the murderer. Henry goes to his old friend John Grismer, an ex-police officer now insurance investigator, to help him uncover what happened to Zenia. In his search for the truth, John finds that Zenia's three supposedly closest friends - magazine editor Roz Andrews, university history professor Tony Fremont and yoga instructor Charis White - are all less than sad at Zenia's death, their lack of remorse which they are open about when questioned by John. Apparently, Zenia came unexpectedly and independently into each of their lives, made it great for a while before she did something intentionally to... Written by
Huggo
I watched this movie last night on TV and even the commercial interruptions didn't dull my enjoyment of it. In fact, it was actually kind of enjoyable to be able to discuss how the plot was thickening every once in a while. The acting was well done - from the lame-brained hippie on Toronto Island to the scientist, the publisher etc, everyone did a great job. So does that imply it was well directed? I think so. It flowed well, the storyline was clear and I was left with the impression that Atwood's original book would be great fun to read. It wasn't perfect, mind you, but the weaknesses were minor, probably because it didn't aim to be some fantastic sophisticated production. It was simple, clear, and fun.
11 of 12 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
I watched this movie last night on TV and even the commercial interruptions didn't dull my enjoyment of it. In fact, it was actually kind of enjoyable to be able to discuss how the plot was thickening every once in a while. The acting was well done - from the lame-brained hippie on Toronto Island to the scientist, the publisher etc, everyone did a great job. So does that imply it was well directed? I think so. It flowed well, the storyline was clear and I was left with the impression that Atwood's original book would be great fun to read. It wasn't perfect, mind you, but the weaknesses were minor, probably because it didn't aim to be some fantastic sophisticated production. It was simple, clear, and fun.