as antiquated as the formula is , i'm surprised hollywood keeps it around : wife cheats on abusive spouse and , instead of leaving him , convinces her lover to kill him so they can be together and get all his money . or , roles can be switched and jealous husband can be the one doing the plotting . as is the case with murder , nicely conceived and gamely acted . douglas plays a businessman , steven taylor . his business is about to go bankrupt . his wife , emily ( paltrow ) , is having an affair with a painter across town , named david ( the expressionless mortensen ) . they plan to let steven in on it - she more than he : " it's not fair to him " . but , steven is no dupe . though , how he knows , or even suspects , enough to have the two photographed during an afternoon rendezvous , is never explained . standard stuff . but , the movie has smart , thinking individuals . like douglas , who has his plan to do away with his wife down to how and why to do what with keys . and , mortensen - a scamster - who agrees to do the " wet work " , but has plans , also . every detail of the murder plot , and the complications that inevitably arise , seems to be coherent and logical , and it's kind of fun watching the genre played out intelligently for once . i liked someof the physical acting between paltrow and mortensen , as during an art exhibition where he sees her , starts walking toward her and she inconspicuously waves him off . then , once they've met in the corner , and douglas comes upon them , they act completely natural and never give any sort of nervous reaction that maybe he knows . and i liked the way douglas seemed to have everything figured out , and together . he's able to verbally explain his motives with well- chosen words . i like dialogue where people come at the subject of discussion from not just one angle , but think a situation through , think about every possibility . murder has that kind of banter . i just wish the film had been about more . i kept waiting for it to ask questions movies like this never ask . for instance , why does the paltrow character keep saying it's not fair to her husband to keep her affair a secret ? as if she's concerned about how he feels . i'm wondering why she would've had the affair in the first place , and not worry about how it may or may not affect him , and why it would only hit her a good ways into the affair to at least let him know about it . does she love her husband ? people don't usually get married otherwise , right ? and if she does love him , how much or how little that she can't try and work things out ? or , _has_ she tried ? does she care about whether or not she has hurt him , or that she'll hurt him again ? steven doesn't seem like such a bad guy ( of course , he _is_ , but that's only later on ) . he's rich . he likes being rich , gives him a certain air of superiority ( at one point he tells paltrow which dress to wear - so , you know he's a real creep ) . maybe he makes her feel small , and insecure , but has it always been that way ? how did it _get_ that way ? also , there's no tangible chemistry between paltrow and mortensen , furthering my question into why-is-she-with-either- man territory . the same goes for douglas' character . he has multiple reasons for wanting his wife dead , not just the obvious ( which , come to think , isn't really a reason at all , considering what he's most worried with ) . but , why is he married to her ? it's an inconsequential line of inquiry in the end , i guess , but wouldn't answering such questions - or even addressing them - give the film a little more dramatic depth ? of course , that would make a longer movie . but hey , attention spans do exist . and why , oh why , do they have to revert to a violent ending ? i saw a movie once called , i believe , lady beware . it starred diane lane . the storyline wasn't quite the same , but it , too , could have ended in a violent way . instead , it chose a more subtle approach that was much , much more effective . a perfect murder deserved one of those , because it has a lot going for it already . -r- 
