A solid true-life conspiracy thriller. |
Unfortunately, given the subject matter and genre, the words 'Based on True Events' on a title card at the beginning of the film created a bit of dissonance and disturbing trains of thought as the film was going on which sometimes distracted moments which should have been powerful - namely, to what extent has this been over-sensationalised by enthusiastic American writers. Having it based on real life has interesting effects on the audience, causing us to not just judge the film on its own merit but also on the despicableness of the guilty parties and the valour of our protagonists as well as, conflictingly, the accuracy with which the whole story is portrayed. With this in mind, whether intentional or not, it felt at times as though an agenda was being pushed which was oblique to the central issue of child abuse in the church, that of portraying the Catholic church as a malignant and powerful organisation with tentacles pervading every level of establishment authority, perhaps to appeal to a generation of consumers savvy to the coercive power of organised religion. I do like a good conspiracy, and my attention piqued most at the revelation of the involvement of the law firm, but it still bothered me not being able to ascertain how much of that conspiracy was entirely factual.
Despite Tom McCarthy's sparse directing filmography to speak of there were some interesting directorial decisions besides the far that the film was a solid piece of good entertainment. For example, twice in the film an Alfonso-CuarĂ³n-esque follow and break of with the camera to suggest a larger continuum of events besides those which the camera can catch at any one time. Another, the interesting staging of the Spotlight office, with shots perfectly to show the different relationships within the team. However the film's extensive use of significant-line-jump-cuts grew quite annoying and at times didn't seem to have a correct sense of what the most significant line to the audience's attention actually was, with some cuts leaving a sense of dissatisfaction at the resolution of the scene.
The two most notable performances of the film undoubtedly go to Mark Ruffalo and Stanley Tucci. Mark Ruffalo, first, as he played a more significant role in the film, was a Spotlight investigative reporter under the editorship of Liev Schreiber. Ruffalo is one of those excellent actors of naturalism where if one hadn't seen him in other films or as himself one would assume how he acts in the film is how he always is - he fully inhabited the character he was playing with well thought-out mannerisms which usually made him want of attention whenever he was in a scene. Stanley Tucci played the lawyer Garabedian, a more interesting exhibit of character-acting for Tucci which will certainly be a memorable performance for the gravitas his character is afforded by the directing. The earnestness and attention with which he plays his part is commendable.
Unfortunately for the genre some of the most questionable performances came from the interviews of survivors, unfortunate as their performances are really what the film depends on for the emotional core of the basis of the movie. However, these were balanced out by some truly heart-wrenching material, so all-in-all it worked out.
I'm giving Spotlight a 4/5 for a solid and interesting film. However, I wouldn't go as far as to call the film 'essential' as some reviews have, as this is over-egging the pudding somewhat in an issue which is well-understood by a lot of people. It's a good movie: not exceptional, but by no means a bad movie either.
Please feel free to comment what you agree or disagree with, I'd be delighted to discuss, and you can leave your email address to be notified of replies or comment anonymously if you'd prefer. More reviews coming soon :)
Go like my Facebook page for updates and to show support!
No comments:
Post a Comment