A man accused of killing his mistress twenty years previously is arrested again on suspicion of murdering his wife.A man accused of killing his mistress twenty years previously is arrested again on suspicion of murdering his wife.A man accused of killing his mistress twenty years previously is arrested again on suspicion of murdering his wife.
- Awards
- 2 nominations
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaMike Robe also directed "The Burden of Proof (1992)"--also a sequel to "Presumed Innocent (1990)"--that focused on the character Sandy Stern, played by Hector Elizondo. (In "Innocent," Stern is played by Alfred Molina.) The characters of Rusty Sabich and Tommy Molto did not appear in that film, but Brian Dennehy, who had played Raymond Horgan in "Presumed Innocent (1990)," appeared in a different role.
- GoofsRusty Sabich is a head appellate judge, ruling on an appeal by a convicted murderer that he prosecuted. In real life, he should have recused (removed) himself from the case or the convicts appellate lawyers should have filed to have him removed from hearing the appeal. Either way he should not have been presiding over this case as he was personally involved.
- Quotes
[having just received some circumstancial evidence against Rusty Sabich]
Tommy Molto: You're giving me buckshot here. I need one bullet. If you want to shoot at the king, you've got to *kill the king*!
- ConnectionsFollows Presumed Innocent (1990)
Featured review
Scott Turow is an amazing writer because of his ability to give full, rich, textured lives to most of the characters in a book. In his fictional world of Kindle county, even the peripheral figures have great,textured back-stories. He has great insight into human nature. It's too bad that you can see almost none of this in the TV movie version of Innocent.
I watched this movie shortly after reading the book. The book was fascinating and absorbing. While the movie was competently made, it lacked most of the detail that makes Turow's books so rich and interesting. The recorded version of the book is 14 hours long, and none of that time was wasted or boring. The movie was probably less than 90 minutes, if you take out the commercial breaks. There was no way for them to compress so much character development and plot into such a small space. And in my opinion, it was wrong to try.
Unfortunately, though the movie isn't awful, I can't think of any reason to recommend it. There are some good performances, but the script is just too skeletal to do justice to this story.
I hope that the next time Scott Turow gets an movie offer on one of his great books, that he holds out for a miniseries instead.
I watched this movie shortly after reading the book. The book was fascinating and absorbing. While the movie was competently made, it lacked most of the detail that makes Turow's books so rich and interesting. The recorded version of the book is 14 hours long, and none of that time was wasted or boring. The movie was probably less than 90 minutes, if you take out the commercial breaks. There was no way for them to compress so much character development and plot into such a small space. And in my opinion, it was wrong to try.
Unfortunately, though the movie isn't awful, I can't think of any reason to recommend it. There are some good performances, but the script is just too skeletal to do justice to this story.
I hope that the next time Scott Turow gets an movie offer on one of his great books, that he holds out for a miniseries instead.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Scott Turow's Innocent
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 29 minutes
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content