To me there's really only one thing a filmmaker/writer should never ever do. They can use all sorts of little cheats and suspend the laws of physics for stylistic effect as much as they want, but when they use those same cheats to resolve the main mystery of the plot, then that's just too stupid. To avoid giving too much detail I'll use a hypothetical example: Suppose you're watching a suspense film and the heroine is up against the wall with killers all around her. They're armed, she isn't. She has no help and no way out, and the situation has been tensely evolving to this point for two hours. Then she just magically turns invisible and flies away with no explanation for how, when, or why she suddenly developed the ability to fly and turn invisible. The end. Good film? No. A terrible cheat. And 1st To Die is just that way. The plot's mystery is resolved by a sudden revelation that someone can do something that's impossible. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.Any idiot can write a good mystery if you don't have to explain how it worked within the laws of physics. Imagine the old "locked room mystery" where the victim has been killed in a room that has been locked from the inside, so how did the killer do it? If the answer is that the killer suddenly developed the ability to pass through brick walls without disturbing them, then it's not a very good mystery, is it?

I felt it was a great story line from James Patterson as usual. I found it very funny that in one see we find Tracy Pollan's "Inspector Lindsay Boxer" reading a book called "Beach House" out by the lake. This is James Patterson's new & up-coming book due out in May of 2006. Interesting how in 2003 it was in this movie. I liked how Patterson seems to keep your attention in his books and I do hope to see many more of his books put to film. One of my favorite books by him is "Roses are Red" and I have learned it will also become a Big Screen movie with a good chance of Morgan Freeman playing the excellent role of Det. Alex Cross. It has a very good plot to it and is well worth putting into a movie.

Let me just start off by saying that this made for TV movie was quite well done. I have seen a few movies made from novels, and we all know what screenwriters and movie directors do to our favourite novels don't we? If first saw Patterson's "Kiss the Girls" way before I even knew that there was a book. I have always been a fan of murder/thriller/whodunnit type movies, and when that movie came out, I was totally captivated by its energy and story. However after I found out that "Kiss the Girls" was actually a novel written by James Patterson, I had to pick up a copy. I thank my ex-girlfriend for getting me hooked onto Mr. Patterson's writing, because I haven't been able to miss any of his books since. Moving on...So I read "Kiss the Girls" and was completely surprised by how entirely different, and more entertaining than the theatrical movie was. Although I loved the movie, it just didn't draw me in like the book did afterwards. So by the time "Along Came a Spider" arrived in the movie theaters, I had already read it's novel counterpart. Again I was entertained, and still enjoy the movie from time to time, but I did not get the great indepth experience as I did with James Patterson's works of art.After reading "1st to Die" and "2nd Chance" before the TV movie came out, I couldn't wait till the movie with Markie Post hit the TV channels. Markie Post? Queen Latifah? Were they really suggested to play the roles of Lindsey Boxer and Claire Washburn? Yup... according to the IMDB, but when the previews came out of "1st to Die", sure enough the casting information had been wrong. From start to finish I found that the TV addaptation was quite well done. However there were quite a few rushed scenes, I felt that overall, this was the best attempt at bringing a Patterson book to the screen.The characters were well played, except that I felt Jill Burnhardt's name was only mentioned once, and when she made her first appearance on the screen, no one knew who the hell she was. At first I thought that she was another female cop thrown into the mess, but once she made a few more appearances, with no one even saying "hey Jill" I kinda figured that she was Seattle's(San Fran's) deputy DA. Thanks for letting the audience know that. Then there was Cindy. I think that she was thrown in just like Jill was, to keep the Murder Club true to the book.The relationship between the four women didn't seem as solid as it did in the novel, and like I said before, a lot of the meetings with them felt rushed like it didn't belong in the movie. Also Cindy (yes I know that she is a reporter) pops up everywhere like she's a freaking psychic. Also with Chris Raleigh, it never states in the movie that he's seperated and has children, but on his tombstone it says "beloved father and husband". With this little tidbit left out, as well as no mention of Lindsey's important father, one goes to wonder how or even if they'll make a "2nd Chance."Pam Grier plays a convincing Claire, as well as Tracy Polly playing Lindsey, but the best performance in the entire movie was done by Robert Patrick. He's always been a great 'evil' looking character. In the end... "1st to Die" moved along quite well, and did stick fairly pure to its novel counterpart. Some things were missing, and some things were rushed, but all in all I recommend a viewing by Patterson fans at least once in their life.

In watching this TV movie I thought that it was much truer to the book then previous attempts to put Patterson on screen. Tracy Pollan was believable as the lead character and it followed the book plot. But as in the other adaptations, I feel that the minor characters were not developed enough. The relationship of the women in the "Murder Club" was not fully explained, but all in all they fit the descriptions given in the book. In "Along Came the Spider" and "Kiss the Girls" (theatrical releases), I felt that the casting of Morgan Freeman as Alex Cross was way off and none of the secondary characters which make the books so much better were explored. These movies on their own might be pleasing to the general public if they are not readers of Mr. Patterson's work, but were disappointing and lacking to myself as an avid reader of the books. If you are looking for a good adaptation, "1st to Die" is worth the time.