I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Strong and Moving!

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

(Originally reviewed: 26/01/2017) I have seen a lot of courtroom thrillers in my time, and none have been as suspense free as Guilty as Sin. Don Johnson plays a narcissistic womanizer who's secretly a nutcase, though his performance may not necessarily be bad, it's all wrong as he comes off as laughable or a Sonny Crockett lost the plot type of guy, in which there are too many moments where I thought, that's Sonny Crockett gone mad and not the presumed character of 'David Greenhill'. The other half is played by De Mornay (Greenhill's attorney, crush) who I have no complaints about here, as she is effective for the most part. There's a lot of supporting characters who are ultimately forgettable, another major problem with this film. Also it's extremely predictable, as we know he's a nut, so he's obviously guilty, so why bother watching any further unless you're intrigued for an ending that's plain and simple, not good. However I will praise its never boring momentum which keeps the picture minimally watchable more times than not.There's a lot of the story that is silly, there's plenty of clichés, and there's enough painfully embarrassing moments to get anyone laughing until the ending which will get anyone cringing with its fake looking, implausible balcony sequence, and yes that has got to be one of the most ridiculous endings I've ever seen in a thriller, and I've sat through The Perfect Stranger and a much worse film called The Gift. You will leave Guilty as Sin knowing two things, 1) Don Johnson loves himself and 2) this film sucks.

Don Johnson really gets to show his stuff impressively playing accused wife murderer David Greenhill. He is vicious, manipulative, conniving and as such, would make a terrific TROLLing poster on the message boards. He is totally without morality, truthfulness or empathy. He is a psychopath BUT he is man-pretty and charming and the women he cons just love him.Rebecca DeMornay is the lawyer who gets conned and then legally forced into defending this indefensible person. The always interesting Jack Warden is her friend private detective Moe. All of the actors are good at their jobs despite a few major plot holes. The story itself is pretty labyrinthine but it can be followed. The ending is satisfying even though unbelievable.The best part is watching the workings of a truly psychopathic mind at work. It may leave you shaken if you know there really are such people out there !

This is a movie with good "bones" (written by Larry Cohen and directed by Sidney Lumet) that for some reason doesn't quite make it.Rebecca DeMornay plays Jennifer Haines, an attorney who notices a man (Don Johnson) while tying up another case. He's staring her down, so she recognizes him again when he makes the newspaper for allegedly killing his wife and then walks into her office after being told she can't see him. His name is David Edgar Greenhill, and he wants Haines to defend her. She doesn't want to, but the court assigns her to the case over her objection. There's something about this guy that's creepy and makes her uneasy.She's right to be uneasy. Greenhill knows all about her life and her boyfriend, and basically uses her as a pawn in his own schemes, all the while intimating that they're lovers and disrupting her relationship.I'm going out on a limb here and guessing that this movie did not have a big budget, and that was part of the problem. It was filmed in Canada, and back in 1993 anyway that meant low-budget. Also, while I like Rebecca DeMornay and Don Johnson okay, they're not exactly Michelle Pfeiffer and Mel Gibson, to name two stars of that era. I think better acting would have helped the movie. Don Johnson was just too much of everything - overly oily, overly smooth speaking, overly gentlemanly, overly charming, overly dressed. Supposedly his character is a gigolo. Maybe some women are desperate enough to fall for this guy but anyone who can't see through his act is pathetic.This movie needed a "star", an attractive man who comes off as very likable naturally, without it being put on, even someone going against type like John Travolta or Tom Hanks (this is the '90s, remember) and then it might have been more compelling. It isn't an easy role - he has to have a threatening subtext, a look in his eyes, something, with everything about him belying it until the claws really come out.De Mornay, on the other hand, definitely conveyed her character's tension, anxiety, and attempt to stay calm, as well as a lot of allure.Jack Warden gives good support as an investigator who helps De Mornay.This is a decent story, with a few things that stretch reality, but like someone said on the board, Johnson is so evil you have to watch the whole thing to see if he gets his comeuppance. A worthy attempt if just not quite right.

**SPOILERS THROUGHOUT THE REVIEW** High powered attorney Jennifer Haines (Rebecca DeMorany) is seduced by handsome, smooth (and obviously sociopathic) David Greenhill (Don Johnson) into defending him over a charge that he killed his wife. As she gets to know him she discovers that he DID kill his wife and is slowly destroying her life. She gets old friend Moe (Jack Warden is wasted) to help her but David isn't above killing to get his way.It starts off good with great acting by DeMornay and Johnson but the story gets sillier as the movie goes on. Some VERY questionable legal technicalities are bought up and DeMorany goes to truly ridiculous lengths to get Johnson convicted WHILE she's defending him! Also there are huge loopholes in the script and DeMornay overreacts (and overacts) when she realizes what's going on. Seriously, wouldn't an intelligent attorney like her see that Greenhill is a raging sociopath AND extremely dangerous? Still all the acting is good and it leads up to a bloody and satisfying conclusion. I give this a 6 but (unless you're a fan of any of the stars) you're not missing anything. I originally saw it back in 1993 in a theatre and I wasn't thrilled with it then either.