Under Suspicion (2000)

Title: Under Suspicion
Director: Stephen Hopkins
Genre: Suspense
Highs: Great performance from Gene Hackman and Morgan Freeman.
Lows: The plot twist was confusing.
RhynoBot Grade: B

This is the first movie I have really like from director Stephen Hopkins ("Lost In Space", "Predator 2"). There was a good story, great acting, and Monica Bellucci, the most gorgeous Italian woman living.

Gene Hackman is a prominent lawyer in San Juan, Porte Rico. He is brought into the police station by Morgan Freeman, who is the chief of police, to clarify earlier testimony regarding the discovery of a young girls body the day before by Hackman. Under duress Hackman agrees to the questioning although he is the keynote speaker at a fund raiser that night (Freeman tells him it will be 10 minutes). Well 10 minutes turns into an hour which turns into an all night interrogation by Freeman and Thomas Jane, who plays the young ambitious detective that is convinced Hackman murdered the girl and would love nothing more then to lock him away for the crime.

Considering the majority of the movie takes place in Freeman's office at the police station Hopkins does a great job of moving things outside by reenactment the testimony of Hackman. This is pretty standard stuff but a fun aspect that Hopkins added, which I really liked, was placing Freeman in the scene that Hackman was describing as he asked his questions. Freeman slowly but surely breaks Hackman down even enlisting the help of his estranged wife played by the smoking hot Bellucci who is convinced he murder the girl as well. Faced with evidence collected at his home and the willingness of his wife to help the police Hackman finally breaks down and starts to confess to the rape and murder of two girls. But then Hopkins tries to through in this plot twist, while Hackman is confessing to the murders in detail Freeman is pulled aside by another detective to inform him that the killer of the girls has been caught, they have photo evidence and they caught him in the act of killing a third girl. HUH??? Then what the hell is Hackman doing? I'm confused, and they don't explain it, they just let him go free and the movies over. Did I miss something? Part of the fun of this movie was watching Hackman and Freeman try to out wit each other. I would have been perfectly satisfied with Hackman being the killer and being broke down to the point of confession. But instead we get a confusing plot twist that didn't need to be there and I found myself unsatisfied with the ending.

Anyway, this is a good movie despite including the wrong ending for this movie, you should see it.