I figured going in this missing person case would not parallel a domestic, or even UK, case. Immediately it was fairly frustrating to watch from early on. Lucie, a UK woman in her early twenties, came to Tokyo for a life adventure. Becoming what is called a "hostess" in the unusual Tokyo club scene certainly was that. The concept just seems dodgy and dangerous even if we're told it isn't sexually like prostitution. That may be so, but it certainly provided an excellent hunting ground for a sexual predator. I am certainly uncomfortable with this as the father of a daughter. Being told for such a massive population center the crime rate is low begs many questions when young Lucie comes up missing. All cultural differences aside, the human animal is driven in similar ways regardless, maybe more so in a traditionally male dominated society?
The film omits so much of what I have come to expect in crime docs about the missing, again, it's frustrating. I don't think these omissions are things lost in translation either. Whatever the Japanese police are finding early on is not revealed. Instead of keying on who was last believed to be with Lucie, and information given by those who worked with her in the same bar, the story focuses on the arrival of Lucie's father. He clashes with the locals taking the story to the press who he tells his youngest daughter are the people who will find Lucie. I take it he has little respect for how Tokyo's finest are moving. There is definitely a disconnect between the two as the lack of respect seems mutual. While the father's modus operandi is of interest, it's Lucie we want to know about which the makers of this documentary never dig into.
I also should mention besides the omission of lack of insight into both victim and early investigation, the film moves at an extremely slow pace. Boring comes to mind. It never pulls the viewer in as such. One never feels a connection to the victim as such. It meanders until it finally, past the mid-point, the police find a gal from Australia who worked in the hostess profession with a chilling experience. She reveals her rape by a client raising red flags. Now, finally armed with some facts, the Tokyo police go more into a mode we're familiar with in the west. But surprisingly this is again drawn out too slowly. Lucie's story could have been told much more succinctly - and much more palpably. Where's the interviews with actual victims who survived? Even when the perpetrator's real name is known, we won't know much about him. A frustrating feeling seems to be the only constant watching this.
I've read many peoples comments about this case as it did make the rounds on the "podcast circuit". I'd have to say just about any of these gave more of the down and dirty grit about Lucie's abduction and murder than this long-winded and un-focused telling. The final irritation is how much was left out about the victim (mainly), the actions of the father beyond the press, and the perpetrator himself. Too add insult, though convicted for life of multiple rapes, the perpetrator escapes being convicted of the actual murder of Lucie which seems to go unanswered as to why he escaped, possibly, his worst crime. The absent murder conviction, though no fault of the film, deserves an explanation as to why which is not properly explored at all. Sorry, but I can only give this production low marks and no recommendation.
The film omits so much of what I have come to expect in crime docs about the missing, again, it's frustrating. I don't think these omissions are things lost in translation either. Whatever the Japanese police are finding early on is not revealed. Instead of keying on who was last believed to be with Lucie, and information given by those who worked with her in the same bar, the story focuses on the arrival of Lucie's father. He clashes with the locals taking the story to the press who he tells his youngest daughter are the people who will find Lucie. I take it he has little respect for how Tokyo's finest are moving. There is definitely a disconnect between the two as the lack of respect seems mutual. While the father's modus operandi is of interest, it's Lucie we want to know about which the makers of this documentary never dig into.
I also should mention besides the omission of lack of insight into both victim and early investigation, the film moves at an extremely slow pace. Boring comes to mind. It never pulls the viewer in as such. One never feels a connection to the victim as such. It meanders until it finally, past the mid-point, the police find a gal from Australia who worked in the hostess profession with a chilling experience. She reveals her rape by a client raising red flags. Now, finally armed with some facts, the Tokyo police go more into a mode we're familiar with in the west. But surprisingly this is again drawn out too slowly. Lucie's story could have been told much more succinctly - and much more palpably. Where's the interviews with actual victims who survived? Even when the perpetrator's real name is known, we won't know much about him. A frustrating feeling seems to be the only constant watching this.
I've read many peoples comments about this case as it did make the rounds on the "podcast circuit". I'd have to say just about any of these gave more of the down and dirty grit about Lucie's abduction and murder than this long-winded and un-focused telling. The final irritation is how much was left out about the victim (mainly), the actions of the father beyond the press, and the perpetrator himself. Too add insult, though convicted for life of multiple rapes, the perpetrator escapes being convicted of the actual murder of Lucie which seems to go unanswered as to why he escaped, possibly, his worst crime. The absent murder conviction, though no fault of the film, deserves an explanation as to why which is not properly explored at all. Sorry, but I can only give this production low marks and no recommendation.