Michelle Williams Movie:

Til Murder Do Us Part Reviews:
You may be surprised at which side of the fence you find youself at the end of the movie.
2006-05-12 - Just like the first jury that was deadlocked, reviewers "Cathy" and "Flanks" are on opposite sides. However it is inappropriate to say that "Flanks" is mentally unstable simplyl because his opinion differs from "Cathy". I believe Betty Broderick should only have been convicted of manslaughter. This does not mean I have "psychological issues."

Around the country, people like "Flanks" and "Cathy" were discussing (and arguing) this case. In this film, you see the wonderful life Betty and Dan had - on the outside. On the inside, you see the fighting, Dan's infidelity, Betty's world caving in, the kids being stuck in the middle, and the tragic conclusion. Stephen Collins and Meredith Baxter do wonderful jobs as Dan and Betty. Watch and decide for yourself how you would've voted if you were on the jury. You may be surprised at which side of the fence you find yourself at the end of the movie.

"TILL MURDER DO US PART" IS SAME MOVIE AS "A WOMAN SCORNED"
2006-01-26 - The movie "Till Murder Do Us Part" is the same movie as "Betty Broderick: A Woman Scorned" Both are for sale on Amazon.com.

I guess "Till Murder Do Us Part" was released first on DVD and VHS. "A Woman Scorned" is only on DVD, which, by the way, consists of two movies, a total of 3 hours in all: "A Woman Scorned" and "Her Final Fury".

I recommend this movie under either title. It is a very interesting true story, which the Lifetime Channel shows on occasion. I enjoyed it so much watching Lifetime that I wanted to purchase a copy for my own personal movie collection.



Off the Mark
2006-01-23 - Betty obviously has some serious mental issues - evident in her testimony. This movie presented her is a light that was somewhat distorted. She was abusive and suffered from a personality disorder. She believed her own lies and portrayed herself as the victim. The previous reviewer is far off the mark. Using terminalogy such as "skank" and "slut" shows that the movie watcher also has some psychological issues that surfaced from apparently watching the movie. Dan Broderick left Betty for the same reason everyone left her. She was abusive, self indulgent, self-serving and a person who felt entitled to love and respect. No one is entitled to that. I watched the court hearing on TV and it is clear that Betty is a cold blooded murdered. She is NOT the victim. Dan and his wife were. Betty was NOT obstracized from her rich friends, she severed ties with them because she could not tolerate them giving her advice to move on with her life. They stayed away from her because she was obviously sick. She was consumed with jealousy and hate. Betty received houses, alimony, child support, vacation homes, etc. She had it ALL. "Flanks" review is outrageously irresponsible in his/her review. To say that two people deserved to be shot to death because Dan Broderick OWED her HIS life is outrageous and disturbing in nature. The movie is made for television. I suggest that anyone wishing to learn more about Betty's disorder should review the transcripts of the actual court hearing. She was convicted of murder, because she's crazy. It's scary that the previous reviewer is so sympathetic to the mindset of a killer.

Cheating husband drove wife to kill
2005-06-09 - Agree or disagree with Betty Broderick, this story is fascinating. Just like with the film "Fatal Attraction", it struck a chord with many women and fear into many men. Betty Broderick was raised to be a good Catholic wife who sacrificed for her husband and children. When Dan Broderick stood in a church and promised to love and cherish her forever, she believed him. However, to Dan, forever meant about 20 years. Then he went out and bought the required midlife crisis car -- a red convertible. And got himself a slutty 20-year-old to sleep with.

When Betty confronts him, he denies it, saying she's crazy. Finally, though, Dan decides he's having more fun with the ho and dumps his wife. But despite Betty having contributed to his professional success, he doesn't want to share 50/50. People may say, "What's she complaining about? She was getting $10,000/month!" But Dan was making like $100,000/month. Besides that, Betty's dreams of this successful life were taken from her. Not just her husband. She lost her prestige in the community, she was ostracized by their rich friends -- not invited to events/ parties/dinners. Dan took the new wife on vacations, parties, kids' soccer games. He basically cut her out of the photo and inserted wifey No. 2. And Betty simply lost it. She could not accept that she got royally screwed by Dan. Every minute of the day was consumed by her hatred of Dan and this skank. And she did what she had to do. I'm not saying it was right, but I UNDERSTAND. As she fought with Dan about her alimony and Dan was saying, "What? What do you want from me Betty?!" She seethed and said, "You OWE me!" For all the years of struggle, for everything she did for the family -- this life was supposed to be her reward and HE OWED HER.

Part One of the movie deals with life up to the murder and the first trial. Betty is shown in a much more sympathetic light. Part Two deals with the second trial and conviction and Betty is portrayed much worse. However, it appears to be an honest portrayal -- warts and all. Anyone who enjoys the Lifetime TV movies such as "Beauty's Revenge" and "A Mother's Justice" will enjoy this DVD.

Who is the guilty one?
2004-09-20 - This is a great 'based on a true story' movie.

Ex-wife is led to kill her former husband and his new partner out of revenge for dumping her.

The wife sacrifices much for the marriage in order that her husband can pursue a professional career. As soon as he makes it as a successful lawyer, he dumps the wife for a younger woman. The wife then stalks the husband and he in turn prevents her from having any access to their children.

It is a thought provoking movie, leaving you with doubt as to who the guilty party really is.