Body of Evidence

Plot synopsis:
An older man, Andrew Marsh, views a homemade pornographic tape. It is later revealed the man died from complications stemming from erotic asphyxiation. The main suspect is the woman who has sex with Marsh in the film, Rebecca Carlson, who after being charged with murder is represented by lawyer Frank Dulaney. The trial begins in Portland, Oregon, and it is not long before Carlson and Dulaney enter a sadomasochistic sexual relationship behind the back of Dulaney's unsuspecting wife.
During their first sexual encounter, Dulaney, overcome by lust, notices too late that Carlson is tying his arms behind his back using his own belt. Carlson pushes him onto the bed, removes his underwear, and while he is restrained, she humiliates him by pouring hot candle wax on his chest, stomach, and genitals, amused by the frustration and increasingly desperate reactions she is eliciting from Dulaney. The two then have sex with Carlson in complete control, an obvious counterpoint to their relationship in the courtoom, where Dulaney is the one in control.
Carlson proclaims her innocence to Dulaney in private and in court, but district attorney Robert Garrett seeks to prove that Carlson deliberately killed Marsh in bed to receive the $8 million he left her in his will. The testimony of Marsh's private secretary, Joanne Braslow, reveals that he had a sexual relationship with her that could have contributed to his death, casting a reasonable doubt as to Carlson's guilt.
Dulaney can not resist Carlson sexually but does not trust her. He maligns Carlson with accusations of her withholding information from him. She plays off timid and upset while he gets angry at her. He makes it clear their affair needs to end and implies he may drop her as a client. That night he goes to the restaurant where his wife works, and she appears clearly upset. She tells him Carlson called her and accuses him of sleeping with her. Dulaney initially plays it off as if she is paranoid, but when she reveals telltale evidence, it is clear he can no longer deny it. She storms off.
Dulaney goes to Carlson's home and angrily demands she tell him what she told his wife. At first she acts innocent, but then she taunts and teases him, which angers him even more, and throws her to the ground. They stare angrily at each other, but it quickly turns to excitement. The two have rough sex again. When Carlson pulls out handcuffs, it angers Delaney. He cuffs her hands to her bed post and roughly initiates sex her, though she enjoys it.
Carlson is shown in court to have had previous sexual relationships with a number of older rich men, including Jeffery Roston, in which her lovemaking was just as rough. Roston says that she abruptly ended their relationship when he got heart surgery and became healthier. Carlson's testimony convinces the jury, which acquits her. Before leaving court, she mockingly thanks her attorney for getting a guilty client off, fully aware that he cannot repeat what she said and that she can not be tried twice for the same crime.
That night, Dulaney visits Carlson's home, where he finds her with Marsh's doctor, Alan Payley, freely discussing the way they conspired to kill Marsh. She taunts Payley by telling him to lie low, as he could be convicted of perjury, and tells him to leave because she has already forgotten him. Carlson bluntly tells Dulaney that her sexual prowess is how she is able to make men do anything. An enraged Payley lashes out at Carlson physically and, after Dulaney pulls him off, Payley shoots her twice. She plunges from a window to her death.

Tags: neo noir, murder

Review:
Can someone literally be, umm, sexed to death?And why do people think Madonna did such a bad job in this film?
Who else could look so sexy as the mega bad girl delivering a line like "I f***--that's what I do."  Madonna is superb and I think she really proved critics wrong when she won a golden globe for Evita a few years after Body of Evidence was released.The plot of this movie is one of the most interesting story lines I have ever known.
It was only a matter of time that by 1993 Modonna one of the worlds most recognized woman and #1 sex symbol was to showcase her enormous and natural talents on the big screen for all to see."Body of Evidence" is a story about greed lust murder and betrayal where Madonna, Rebecca Carlson, is accused of murdering her rich and elderly lover with the most potent and deadly weapon at her disposal, her body.
Attorney Frank Dulaney, Willam Dafoe, takes the case for Carlson's defense and it turned out the be the biggest mistake that he ever made in his entire life.The movie goes from the ridiculous to the sublime and every thing else in between and by the time the movie is over you feel like you went over Niagara Falls on a surf board.
You have to say one thing about "Body of Evidence" it's not at all boring and Madonna dose have acting talents with her very effective portrayal of the sexy and over the top Rebecca Carlson, even though she was obviously playing herself.
Willam Defoe was very good as Rebecca's lawyer who was manipulated by her like all the men that she manipulated in the movie; you couldn't fault him for that once she turned it on the poor man was a goner.
The movie has a number of shocking and explosive surprises that will keep you guessing until the final credits start to roll and is much better then you would expect from all the negative comments that it got at the time of it's release.
Madonna's acting surprisingly evoking sympathy as well as outrage during the entire movie, Madonna was very good in the scene where she was on the witness stand, that even rival her scenes in the buff, which was the real reason for most people seeing the film, that gives the audience and extra bonus..
Now, the problem lies not so much within Madonna's acting but timing...the film was released 3 months after her SEX book pictorial was released.
That and the nudity and strong sexual acts, Body of Evidence is a left over movie stolen from the Basic Instinct genre.
The storyline is tight and engaging, Madonna much better than usual, the sex scenes good, even if Willem Defoe appears more comfortable in the courtroom scenes, and the ending brilliant.
Willem Dafoe seems on auto-pilot throughout, cast as a defense attorney opposite Madonna, playing a woman who is suspected of killing her wealthy older lover with too much rough-housing in the bedroom.
(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon.)Not that there is a TV version.We could also call this 'Madonna on top' or 'Madonna in charge' or maybe 'She can show you the power you can have from the prone position.' The one thing about Madonna, other than having no shame (and I admire her for that) is that she can crawl and not feel the slightest bit reduced.She's not especially bad in this mediocre thriller, nor especially good.
Strangely enough, Madonna is on trial for committing such a terrible act!I cannot completely hate the movie for some nice scenes between Dafoe and the 'Material Girl.' But if you can think of any other reason to watch this tripe, be it for pitying Julianne Moore as one of her earlier works or for just plain abusing your life, please do tell!
'Body of Evidence' should simply have been called 'Madonna's Sex Movie.' Could have done better with it..
It's so bad that other well respected actors like Archer , Moore , Defoe and Prochnow sink to her levelSimply one of the worst courtroom dramas ever made.
Willem Dafoe plays a lawyer who becomes involved with his client, Madonna, a woman accused of intentionally murdering her rich, elderly lover through strenuous, kinky sex.
Good actors like Dafoe, Joe Mantegna, Anne Archer, Juergen Prochnow and Frank Langella are totally wasted.
The question that i have to ask is why do good actors like Jullianne Moore and Willem Defoe take on movies like this?
perhaps it is hard to tell how bad a movie is going to be when you agree to make one but surely they must a read this silly script or perhaps Defoe agreed to make this because of the activities he gets up to with Madonna and lets face it who can blame him, she was in her prime in 1993 and she did look good, shame her acting was not good as her sexual activities .
goofy dialogue+implausible story+bad acting=typical madonna movie.
Julianne Moore, Willem Dafoe, Joe Mantegna are pretty respected actors and even Anne Archer and Frank Langella have done some good work in their careers, but this movie would have to be the low point of any of their careers.
I give this movie 10 out of 10 only for Madonna's incredible body, & her amazing performance in the sex scenes, which by the way i wonder how she made it while there are a lot of people behind the camera?!
The people who say that the plot is so dull don't get that body of evidence was made in the first place to satisfy Madonna's huge promotion to sex in the nineties..
It was like a really good 'Law & Order' episode...There was great suspense, strong sexual scenes, twist in the story line.and not a bad cast.
After she is accused of such a "crime" the lawyer she chooses to represent her is Willem defoe.OK, so it is not the most plausible plot line but this movie can still be enjoyed, not least for Madonnas hot body in numerous steamy scenes which although often criticised I found to be very well done and quite erotic.
It is true that Madonna and her body are the main reason to watch this thriller but there are some decent genuine performances by defoe and mantegna battling it out in the court room and Anne Archer as the deceased' embittered ex.
Think about it - replace the sex scenes (which are not that good) with some pies in the face, and this is almost as plausible as a Naked Gun Movie.
Who would have thought that anyone would buy this as a legitimate thriller.The lawyers in this film (Dafoe and Mategna) are two of my favourite actors, but they are so unbelievably incompetent that is flushes this movie down the toilet.
I think Madonna and her lawyer had a good on-screen chemistry and it was a fully valid chill-out film to watch.
I do not fancy Madonna, but I like her persona and her acting and I think she was good in this film..
I'm not a fan of Madonna's music, and her acting certainly doesn't present anything noteworthy.Further, I don't consider myself prurient (at least no more often or to a greater degree than the average person).However, there are occasionally scenes in movies, where two attractive persons are involved in romantic couplings which are in the upper portion of anyone's "list" for the "steam" provided.Examples would be scenes: between Mickey Rourke and Kim Basinger in "Nine 1/2 Weeks" (especially the one in the outdoor stairwell); and Michael Douglas and Glenn Close in the elevator and continuing towards, and in, the kitchen, in "Fatal Attraction."So it is with this film, most particularly the action between Willem Dafoe and Madonna in the parking garage.
No fast forwarding on this film.One way I rate a movie, is to take out the sex scenes, and see if the story still holds together.
Body Of Evidence is just another example of an interesting idea ruined by an attempt to fill a market void rather than create a solid story.The film, such as it is, was just one big part of an advertising campaign for another Madonna release.
Body of Evidence (1993) ** (out of 4)Rebecca Carlson (Madonna) is arrested for the murder of her lover.
Her lawyer Frank Dulaney (Willem Dafoe) takes the case and soon starts to fall for her sexual nature.After the huge success of BASIC INSTINCT there were all sorts of erotic thrillers being released.
Both films are rather poorly director and have screenplays that wouldn't cut it on a made-for-television film.As you watch the movie you're suddenly hitten with the fact that Madonna really can't act.
The star power is the strength of the feature and the makers use it wisely but Madonna needs some work on her acting skills, Willem Dafoe is brilliant enough for carrying around the almost 100 minutes of the feature where he is supported nicely by Julianne Moore.
After watching this movie the only thing i could think of is Madonna's ass.
But who cares.Willem Dafoe playing a lawyer who got sense of admiration for Madonna (more like for her ass) and trying to save her from electric chair.
It is a good movie starring this time Willem Dafoe.
The chemistry between him and Madonna is again really good, but this time,the movie looks way more professional compared to "Who is that girl", for instance.
Most of the public were fed up with Madonna and sex and people basically ignored this movie and one of her best CD's, Erotica.The plot involves Rebecca Carlson (Madonna) who has been accused of murdering her much older lover by deliberately having kinky sex with him despite his severe heart condition.
There's also the deceased man's secretary Joanne (Anne Archer) who is convinced that Madonna killed him to get his riches but it turns out that Joanne may have been much closer to her employer than just working for him.It's a murder mystery and a courtroom drama.
But put Madonna aside for a moment and note how terrible the movie's plot is, how laughably bad the dialogue is, how wretched the performances of the rest of the cast are.
It was nominated for six Golden Raspberries, although unaccountably lost the coveted "Worst Picture" award to "Indecent Proposal", to my mind a far better film.Given the film's low quality, I found myself wondering just why so major actors- Willem Dafoe, Joe Mantegna, Anne Archer, Julianne Moore, all of whom are capable of much better things than this- ever got involved with it.
Perhaps Dafoe couldn't resist the temptation of doing love scenes with two hot young actresses, Moore and the Queen of Sex, the Lady Madonna herself.
There is, of course, one school of thought which holds that she cannot act and that she should have stuck to her singing career, but in fact by the time this film came out in 1993 she had already given decent performances in films like "Desperately Seeking Susan", "Who's That Girl?" and "A League of Their Own", and was later to give a great one in "Evita".
"Body of Evidence" may have been a lousy film, but it was also a controversial one, and coming as it did just after the release of her pornographic coffee-table book "Sex" it helped to strengthen Madonna's hard-won reputation as somebody edgy and dangerous.
The script is relentlessly trashy, the highly touted sex scenes are both funny and wince-inducing, simultaneously, and Madonna proves once and for all that her vivid, multidimensional personality as a singer DOES NOT translate to movies!
Frank Langella is quite good in a small cameo, but Archer, Dafoe and the rest of the cast are forced into incessant overacting to deliver their characters when most of the time the only thing anyone is interested in is Madonna.
(Steal from legendary filmmakers...Put lots of unnecessary sex in your film...Hire actors who can't act...And you've got a movie!).
It tries to be "Basic Instinct" in many ways, but really doesn't hold water (even though Basic Instinct was primarily sex scenes put to a movie -- making it garbage as well.)  Madonna's performance was REALLY bad in this one, delivering lines in a monotone voice, no facial expressions and literally looking like she has to "think" about the line before she delivers it.This movie was put out to promote (in my opinion,) Madonna's other financial projects which is why it is so bad.
Enter Dafoe on the case (another asset to the film-that raspberry award nomination was bogus) who takes Madonna as on a client, and that's not all, as seen in awesomely hot scenes with class, later on the film, that rival Basic Instict's.
It's got actors we love, some good lashings of sex, (a sexier movie than Basic Instinct, one scene even involving hot wax) involving courtroom scenes, some comedy scenes and Madonna's, you know what.
Willem Dafoe and Joe Mantegna are good enough as the rival lawyers to make the courtroom scenes very effective, and as a courtroom drama alone (paying as little mind as possible to Madonna's scenes) it's well written, well acted and quite entertaining.
The only possible way to approach a film like Body of Evidence is to treat it as what it is; a B movie, and even at that, its effectiveness is middling.
Now add the sex scenes with Madonna and it turns and ordinary movie into something a bit more special, puts Sharon Stone into the shade.
"Body of Evidence" is famous mostly as being the poor man's "Basic Instinct," and it probably wouldn't have made $10 except for the fascination people have with Madonna.
Madonna looks like a teenage boy compared with the lovely Ms. Moore.Anne Archer is plenty sexy too..
In "Body of Evidence", the consequences of sex games lead to the death of one partner and the other accused of murder.Briefly, the singer-actress Madonna plays a character that seems much like herself: a woman whose sexual appetite either matches or exceeds that of most males while simultaneously she likes to play dominant and engage in acts of bondage.
Rebecca Carlson (Madonna) is accused of murder, and Willem Dafoe plays her attorney Frank Dulaney who agrees to defend her in court.The trial and courtroom become the platform by which the realities of her relationship with the deceased, her sexual desires, and her previous relationships come to light.
people should like a movie for what it is and not who's in it...and i'm not saying this just because i'm madonna's #1 fan!
Both Madonna and Willem Dafoe convince in these scenes (as they should, since these scenes are the reason why BODY OF EVIDENCE got made in the first place!) The movie as a whole is boring and often bad acted.
It would be easy to comment on Madonna's and Willem Dafoe's acting, but in the end the problem is the movie itself.
Obviously made with the success of BASIC INSTINCT in mind(itself a highly overrated film), the film features shock queen Madonna as a sultry murder suspect who is on trial for killing her rich, weak-hearted older lover with too much rough sex(hey, it happens).
The sex scenes between Miss Madonna and Mr. Dafoe(which include hot candle wax, broken glass, and handcuffs), aren't sexy.
She had released her album, "Erotica," her book, "Sex" and this film, "Body Of Evidence.Watching this movie is like watching an incredibly brutal train wreck.
Lawyer Frank Dulaney comes to defend Miss Carlson but finds himself drawn into her sexual world as he tries to find out if she really did plan to kill him.This review contains spoilers - but it doesn't matter cause the plot's crap!At a time these erotic mainstream thriller things were all the rage - Basic Instinct, Colour of Night - everyone wanted in.
Acting as sex is a rather old idea.The selection of actors shows that the producers wanted people who know how to work with these ideas, at least in the case of Dafoe (see "Boondock", Moore ("End of Affair") and Archer.But as you almost certainly know, Madonna's persona proves vacant and the director's vision has no center.
but those of us who don't like pain and sex mixed will find it revolting.I think this movie would have been much better if there had been more time allowed on screen for genuine dialog between Madonna and William DeFoe's character.
My wife and I have a philosophy that one doesn't know a good movie until you've seen how bad it can get.wife: Madonna's not very pretty, is she?
Now, with a better script, including less lines for Madonna, and the switching of Joe Mantegna and Willem Dafoe, maybe we have something then.
Madonna is clearly loving playing a sexy femme fetal and she was not helped by the fact that the movie is just to over the top.
Madonna re-created her look from the film for the music video of her song "Bad Girl", released at the same time..
Madonna is a bad "actress" in this movie.This movie contains hardcore sex scenes and was nominated at the Razzies as Worst Movie.
The rest of the cast are obviously more used to acting well and do so fine, the story is obviously mostly remembered for the sex stuff, with Madonna getting her clothes off a lot and trying to be seductive, only sometimes doing it (the masturbation on the floor scene for example), but actually I found the courtroom drama plot really interesting, so all in all it isn't a bad erotic thriller.
Madonna plays the shagger, and Willem Dafoe her lawyer and shaggee.There is one glaring plot hole at the very start of this movie.
I watched this movie because I want to see Madonna getting jiggy.I don't see what Rebecca has done wrong.