Boobirt Stylish but barely mediocre overall

Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

hawksmom87 This was a fabulous movie - Farrah Fawcett was superb as the spoiled, tormented Joan, Andy Griffith personified the character of a rich oil-man who always got his way, and Sam Elliott is simply so sinister it's gives you goosebumps!! I've seen the movie a few times, but as with any movie taken from a book (be it Ann Kurth's or otherwise) it can never capture all the details that the real story possesses. I have read "Blood and Money" by Tommy Thompson, and it is a captivating read - you seriously can't put it down! If you have seen the movie, you MUST read the book - it will give you so much more insight into the characters. I do not recommend reading the book before watching the movie, as it (the movie) will appear as a let down, and yet it really is a great movie. Watch it first, then read Tommy Thompson's book - in that order - and it will fill in all the blanks.

liamforeman This movie was well-acted, notably Farrah Fawcett finally getting a positive review. She has been a highly underrated actress. I live five minutes from River Oaks, so I know the houses (Ash Robinson's renovated house is my favorite in River Oaks).The downside. I've read both Ann Kurth's and Thomas Thompson's books. Ann Kurth's deserves a huge eyeroll. In her mind she was this clueless, naive, divorcée who suffered because she loved too much. Uh, in Houston, we call women like her homewreckers and a few other choice words. The ending as said above is just preposterous, and I can't believe she put that in her book. It loses all credibility. First of all, the autopsy on John Hill is indisputable that it is him. Secondly, let's defy logic and reality and suppose that John Hill did make it to Mexico, WHY would he call his ex-wife and play his piano concertos? He's trying to start over again unnoticed and incognito. So after Ann's ending, you just have to wonder how much other BS she's written in her novella. Thompson's book is engrossing, in depth, and the movie should have been based on this. I believe that John Hill was involved in his wife's death. Anyone in Houston would wonder why would he take his wife to Sharpstown Hospital when they live in River Oaks, where the med center is only ten minutes away? That to me was extremely suspicious. And really, why would he wait so long to finally get her to the hospital? This is an intriguing note in Houston's history.

tarmcgator I haven't seen this film in its entirety and don't intend to comment on it as entertainment -- but as "docudrama," it comes from a highly biased source. The book "Prescription: Murder" was written by Ann Kurth, a major "character" in the story. Her account is, not surprisingly, rather subjective. It's unlikely that the "whole truth" about the murders depicted in this movie will ever be known, but I would strongly recommend Thomas Thompson's "Blood and Money" as a more objective account of these events (and as a very good "read" on its own merits). BTW, Kurth sued Thompson for defamation regarding his portrayal of her in "Blood and Money"; she lost.

Robert J. Maxwell SPOILERS.This TV movie was originally shown in two parts and it shows. The bifurcation is so distinct that the parts might have been about two separate incidents.Part I is the most interesting. It comes as no surprise that some Texans are very rich. But to watch Sam Elliott as the doctor, playing Bach on a harpsichord is an unforgettable experience, what with his red-chili accent. And he not only knows who Gertrude Stein is, but he can quote her too. So he marries the temptingly rich and even more temptingly palpable Farrah Fawcett. The movie shows us that not all is well out there on the range, however. She's given to a great deal of horseback riding. I've always wondered why some women were so attracted to horses. Men have towards horses what is basically a utilitarian attitude, but with women something much more is going on. As a psychologist, I was curious enough to enter "women and horses" into a search engine to see what research, if any, had been done on the subject. I wound up at a very odd Brazilian site, but that's another story.Part I is an interesting exploration of the social dynamics of upper-crust Texas life. If America ever decides to built pyramids and sphynxes, they'll do it in Texas. Oil money is one thing, but the ability to play Bach is quite another.Then comes Part II, he said in a voice laden with doom. Who wrote this garbage? None other than Ann Kurth, wife number two. (The story is based on her book, so you can imagine.) Dr. Elliott's marriage may not be all that happy, but it takes three to tango. Katherine Ross is presented as a naive innocent overwhelmed by the attentions of Doctor Elliott. They even have "their" song. I spelled out the word "Doctor" in that sentence because I want to emphasize the implications of his status. Every red-blooded American status-vulture wants to marry a doctor and then clean his clock during the divorce settlement. Of course this isn't how Kurth presents herself. She knows nothing of what's going on and must be seduced by Doc Elliott. (If she could have gotten away with it, one suspects that she would have mentioned somewhere along the way that she was a virgin.) The term "homewrecker" never comes up. Ross becomes suspicious of Elliott after they're married. Did he kill his wife?In an absolutely preposterous scene, which takes place in a car he's driving, she confronts him with her suspicions, he confesses to her that he did the foul deed, and then tries to kill her. Here's how it's played out. (If you can believe this part, I have a bridge for sale that might be of interest to you -- surprisingly affordable.) "I did it," Elliott tells Ross. "Injected her with every foul substance I could find -- pus, blood, puke", or words to that effect. It's exactly the sort of confession that would be dreamed up by someone who knows absolutely nothing of lethal substances. Elliott, now deranged, tries to murder Ross. Here's how he tries to do it. He steers the car over to the right, off the road, so it scrapes against the guard rail and emits a shower of sparks. Damage to car? Dents and abrasions. Damage to intended victim? None. This guy has to be the world's clumsiest murderer. Anyone who recognizes the name Gertrude Stein can pull of a better attempt. But, of course, in real life Sam is gone, so Kurth can claim anything she likes without fear of being disputed.The last scene in the movie deserves comment. Elliott has been found shot dead, or so it seems, the cadaver's face being unrecognizable. Ross hears disconcerting rumors that Elliott is still alive and practicing in Mexico or someplace. Ross witnesses an accident and a doctor is hastily summoned. She watches from a distance as the doctor bends over the patient. Could it be? --- The doc then looks up and stares directly at Ross, but he's wearing shades and what appears to be a Groucho nose and mustache, so we can't be certain. Last shot. Ross is alone at night and the phone rings. No one answers on the other end, but the melody of "their" song drifts out of the receiver. Fade out. I will just ask, more or less en passant, if you were a murderer on the lam, thought to be dead, would you call your hateful ex-wife and let her know you were alive and kicking?But enough. The movie is insulting to the viewer.