TWO OR THREE SOFT SPOTS IN THE SCRIPT OF “FRACTURE.”

(c) A.J. Malouin

We gave “Fracture” highish marks and recommended that you see it. This stylish and gripping drama is reviewed in-depth on our blog, in the current postings. We found, however, what we think are two or three HUGE flaws in the scripting. If you haven’t seen “Fracture” yet, don’t read the following, as it might wreck the film for you. If you have seen “Fracture” give us a reply and lettuce know whether or not you agree with us.

Okay, so HOW did Crawford get the murder weapon out of the house? It seems to us inconceivable that a Police Detective would know soooo little about the deadly weapon on his own hip that he would not notice when it had been exchanged for an identical model which, of course, had been discharged recently. That Detective Nunally would abandon his weapon and THEN would not check it more-than-daily seems to us preposterous. We readily admit that we know nothing about Police Procedures, but we postulate that the one thing above all that a Police Officer of Any Rank has to be aware of is the status of his own deadly weapon.

Further, how could Crawford be sooooo sure that Hostage Negotiator Nunally would arrive on the (attempted) murder scene? The whole deal about exchanging weapons is of course BASED on Nunally’s presence at the house in which Crawford’s wife lies mortally wounded. This second point is the weakest of our three objections to the scripting— but IF Nunally doesn’t (1) show up on the crime scene, (2) lay down his weapon, (3) then ignore it completely, and, most importantly, (4) not bother to check on the status of his own weapon during the entire time of the investigation…wellllll, then the “clever” plot of switching weapons seems lamer than a “Matlock” script (and that ain’t Good.)

Now here is the Biggest problem WE found with the scripting of this very-watchable movie: Crawford was tried and found innocent of attempted murder in the case of his wife. Crawford’s innocence is based, primarily, on the fact that the murder weapon could not be found. Beachum then makes the startling discovery that Detective Nunally, toooooo “shocked” by his lover’s death, has been toooo shell-shockt to discover: the dude Nunally has had his weapon switched out on him. (BTW? The way in which this dawns on Beachum– the set piece with the two cell phones which are identical and are laid down side-by-side, is more stuff worthy of a “Matlock” script!)

The minute Crawford is found innocent of attempted murder, we are shown references to the “double jeopardy” construct of jurisprudence: a person cannot be tried twice for the same crime.

We are/were disappointed in Crawford in the way that he strutted his stuff in front of Beachum and others after beating The System. Now the script would have us believe that, the attempted-murder weapon having been found, Crawford can be tried for A New Crime: the murder of his wife. This murder is postulated to have occurred when Crawford signed the papers to take his brain-dead wife off of life support. The notion in the script is that he can now be tried for murder.

Signing the papers to terminate a life on life support is NOT murder, however. It is a perfectly legal process — which was not even carried out by Crawford. It is the hospital staff who “pull the plug.”

So HOW can Crawford go to trial again, this time for the murder of his wife??!?

Ain’t nothing illegal about her death.

Al, especially, was disappointed with the stupid turnings in the script. He believed Crawford to be brilliant, brave and righteous. He believed Beachum to be shallow, silly and gullible.

It’s the mark of a successful movie that Al held these strong feelings about both of these characters.