Compelling Evidence (1995)

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

The late Dana Plato has a chance to shine in this mystery thriller. Plato fans will love it!!!!

The only possible reasons to watch this is if a) you are a Brigitte Nielsen completist; or b) you have a morbid desire to see the late Dana Plato's breasts (my reason was the latter, but I've already come to terms with my sickness).Bad acting, bad script, bad cinematography, and non-existent production values add up to worthless dreck, even by direct-to-video standards.Danny Fendley, playing a "famous action star" looks about as buff as my very fat beagle. Besides not looking good in the part, he can't act very well. This might have been part of The Method, of course: he became an action star in his own mind and like all action stars, was incapable of delivering lines well.Melissa Moore, who is topless in most of her scenes, looks like a topless action star. Not counting her chest, she's shrill and uninteresting.Dana Plato. Poor Dana Plato. She delivers some emotion (not much) in her readings, but you still wonder what she was doing here. Surely she had to know that even with nudity, this could not be a route back to Hollywood stardom. In retrospect, she only furnishes leering pathos.I don't remember much of Brigitte Nielsen. She was killed off shortly after giving a canned speech to her husband (the "action star").The script does not help this untalented cast. It's silly in terms of its plot, and plodding in its dialog.Even the subtitle, "Murder in Hollywood" is wrong: this was filmed (taped) in Atlanta. If Edward Wood had lived another 20 years, he might have ended up directing this, and probably would have improved it.

Once in a blue moon, I'll read comments about a film BEFORE I watch it. (I usually DON'T do this, to avoid being influenced.) The former was the case, however, prior to my viewing of COMPELLING EVIDENCE. I felt the need to be more cynical, so, based on the reviews of it, I selected this cinematic masterpiece as the sole celluloid wonder which I had time to see that day. I COULD have picked others, but, this sounded like the flick to be certain to fulfill my masochistic needs: you know...to make me shake my head; roll my eyes; and almost puke. And it met these expectations, primarily because of the dreadful acting. But then, Danny Fendley does that to me. I have seen him in other movies and there's just something about his style, or his delivery, or I don't know what, which I'd find better in much smaller doses. (How 'bout non-speaking roles?) Also displayed frequently was that tell-tale low-budget audio. And, the story is so incredible that no cast could salvage it: An action star's wife is murdered; he's got a mistress; then, he goes from hating an intrusive reporter, to bangin' her, and maintaining his innocence via her program. Talk about messed up. This takes the cake.

Let me give the pros first. Brigitte Nielsen looks really good in this film and actually acts capably. She is also killed off in about 10 minutes. There is an attractive actress at the beginning who gets naked and then killed stupidly.That's it. There's nothing else to recommend about it.Matt