Summary:When up-and-coming District Attorney Mitch Brockden (Dominic Cooper) commits a fatal hit-and-run, he feels compelled to manipulate the case to acquit the accused criminal who was found with the body and blamed for the crime. Following the trial, Mitch’s worst fears come true when he realizes that his actions freed a guilty man, and he soonWhen up-and-coming District Attorney Mitch Brockden (Dominic Cooper) commits a fatal hit-and-run, he feels compelled to manipulate the case to acquit the accused criminal who was found with the body and blamed for the crime. Following the trial, Mitch’s worst fears come true when he realizes that his actions freed a guilty man, and he soon finds himself on the hunt for the killer before more victims pile up.…Expand
District Attorney, Mitch Brockden (Dominic Cooper), goes out one night to celebrate a big victory, and fearing for the safety of his car, in a bad neighborhood, decides to drive home drunk. On the way, he hits a kills a man, running across the street. Another man, Clinton Davis (Samuel L.District Attorney, Mitch Brockden (Dominic Cooper), goes out one night to celebrate a big victory, and fearing for the safety of his car, in a bad neighborhood, decides to drive home drunk. On the way, he hits a kills a man, running across the street. Another man, Clinton Davis (Samuel L. Jackson) is charged with the crime and it's Brockden's job to prosecute the man accused of committing his crime. Not wanting to convict an innocent man, Brockden blows the case, but afterwards finds out that the wounds on the man he hit, were not consistent with being hit by a car, and match the wounds of seven unsolved homicide victims. Now Brockden must find out if he mistakenly let a serial killer go free. Reasonable Doubt, unlike many similar films, actually had a unique and original story. Both Dominic Cooper and Samuel L. Jackson were terrific, and the film really could have been the hidden gem of the year, but only got 3.5 stars. The reason is simple, while it was a great story, it was far too predictable to be what it could have been. I really it hate when the Writers assume that the audience is too dumb to figure out what's going on. That's what happens here, while the story is tremendous, everything is laid out in such a way, that even a child would know what would happen next. Aside from that, the great story and terrific cast make for an exciting film, that was quite enjoyable, but it was just predictable to a fault.…Expand
The reviews are being a bit too harsh, I felt that the movie was rather fun to watch, and although some things may have been unreasonable, it still completes its goal - entertaining the audience
Critics didn't like this movie much, 19 of 100 at Meta Score is Overwhelming Dislike...
Samuel Jackson as a villain in the film may be one problem. Not that he wouldn't be a good bad guy, but he does rarely play one. Big Stars always wanna be loved... and in this one the Bad part aboutCritics didn't like this movie much, 19 of 100 at Meta Score is Overwhelming Dislike...
Samuel Jackson as a villain in the film may be one problem. Not that he wouldn't be a good bad guy, but he does rarely play one. Big Stars always wanna be loved... and in this one the Bad part about Sam is hard to find. He seems innocent throughout, no real 'I'm a killer' tension from the script. Even at the end it's hard to believe that 'The Jack Man' would be huntin' us!
The DA, the other main character in the film, isn't too bright... he does any number of boneheaded things, especially for someone who is supposed to be on the side of Justice. So there isn't much to cling to in our fabled 'good guy' area.
Médiocre sans être mauvais et de surcroît très générique, La loi du tueur fait penser invariablement à un téléfilm dans lequel Samuel L. Jackson se serait égaré pour payer les réparations du toit ; ce ne serait pas la première fois, cet acteur pourtant excellent a en effet quelques daubes àMédiocre sans être mauvais et de surcroît très générique, La loi du tueur fait penser invariablement à un téléfilm dans lequel Samuel L. Jackson se serait égaré pour payer les réparations du toit ; ce ne serait pas la première fois, cet acteur pourtant excellent a en effet quelques daubes à son tableau de service.
Ainsi, bien que le scénario ait de la suite dans les idées, quelques détails sont traités par dessus la jambe et la réalisation terriblement conventionnelle ne l'aide en rien. En outre, le petit gars Dominic Cooper est bien gentil mais désespérément médiocre comme pour faire écho à l'ensemble du film. On ne s'y ennuie pas... mais on est loin de vraiment s'y intéresser !…Expand
Reasonable Doubt had incredulous plot holes that they made me want to wreck the DVD (I couldn't however. It was from the library...). Here's one (the biggest one): a district attorney thinks he'll be fine if he drives home intoxicated. He hits someone, and they end up dead. Then he's theReasonable Doubt had incredulous plot holes that they made me want to wreck the DVD (I couldn't however. It was from the library...). Here's one (the biggest one): a district attorney thinks he'll be fine if he drives home intoxicated. He hits someone, and they end up dead. Then he's the lawyer involved in the case.…Expand
"Reasonable Doubt" seems more like an unfinished script as a finished film. Unoriginal, illogical, predictable, unitelligent.
Really remarkable about the film is only one thing: The running time is given by 91 minutes. In fact, he has only 80 minutes. The closing credits have more than 11"Reasonable Doubt" seems more like an unfinished script as a finished film. Unoriginal, illogical, predictable, unitelligent.
Really remarkable about the film is only one thing: The running time is given by 91 minutes. In fact, he has only 80 minutes. The closing credits have more than 11 minutes. I think that's a world record. This has otherwise only epic-films with a running time of 3 hours.
So "Reasonable Doubt" is an absolute bluff-package. In every respect.…Expand