True Story wants
very much to understand the evil that men do, but it’s too superficial to dig
deep enough into its subject. The film is based on an actual case, that of
convicted murderer Christian Longo. Longo was given the death penalty for the
2001 murders of his wife and three young children. The film chronicles the
strange relationship that develops between Longo (played by James Franco) and a
disgraced ex-New York Times reporter
named Mike Finkel (played by Jonah Hill). Finkel has just been let go from his
post at the Times because he
fabricated part of a story he wrote about the African slave trade. After
returning to his home in Montana and his wife (Felicity Jones), who works in
the library of a university, Finkel discovers that Longo used his name whilst a
fugitive from justice. Intrigued, Finkel reaches out to Longo in prison. And
here’s where the movie loses me. When Finkel first encounters Longo, he tells
the suspected murderer that he can relate to Longo because “he’s been through a
trial of his own,” and he wanted to know “what it was like to be me.” Longo is
obviously thrilled to be the subject of a vulnerable reporter’s curiosity—not to
mention Finkel’s ticket to career salvation. And Finkel becomes enamored of
Longo in very creepy and incredulous ways.
I haven’t read Finkel’s book about his relationship with
Longo; nor am I familiar with the details of the actual murder case and subsequent
trial. But the film documents an exchange that is hard to take. The writers—David
Kajganich and Rupert Goold (Gold also directed)—are trying to explore the
complex range of emotions at play here: On the one hand, Finkel has been
publicly humiliated for falsifying information; his reputation is marred and he
desperately needs a good story to revive his career; this makes Finkel vulnerable
to the manipulations of a sociopath (assuming Longo is actually guilty). Meanwhile,
there is the question of Longo’s guilt. Did he really do the unthinkable? Or is
he just the perfect wrongfully accused man, nailed to the wall by
circumstantial evidence and motive? Finkel stands to gain here too: He might be
the one person to believe the innocent man, thus preventing another senseless
death if Longo is acquitted of the five murders he is accused of committing.
These are fascinating ideas, but the movie doesn’t seem
equipped to handle them with any finesse or curiosity. The relationship between
Longo and Finkel is clumsily established with a montage sequence. I wish there
had been scenes of Finkel spotting Longo while he did push-ups, set to some
amped-up 80s power song by the likes of Men at Work or Duran Duran. The movie might
have worked better as a spoof of crime dramas than the real thing. But that may
also be the fact that we’re seeing two actors who have been associated with
comedy for so long now trying to break out of that mold and do something
different.
I won’t dispute their acting skills. Both Franco and Hill are
strong performers. But there’s nothing else underneath those performances. The film
doesn’t really event capture the tingling mysteriousness that pervades strong
examples of this genre. We’re never immersed in the film the way that we should
be. And moments of bad dialogue and seemingly odd, incredulous character choices only mar an already muddled film.
No comments:
Post a Comment