John Doe asks a valid question, "What if law fail to protect civilian?". It's a very intriguing premise, and the film succeeds in involving the audience to mentally invest in the dilemma. For the sake of enhancing the social nuance, it portrays the story with back and forth pace as well as accounts from journalists, lawyers and polices. However, it's also very heavy-handed in its execution, many other movies have done better with more refined production.
The title is pretty self-explanatory, this is the story of a vigilante called John Doe, who kills repeated offenders. Unlike most movies, it's presented in almost exclusively in cameras' point of view, such as recorded interviews, homemade video or CCTV. This semi-mockumentary approach does have its merit, it's easier to produce participation for viewers as though they are watching news or investigative journalism. Unfortunately, it's a tad too ambitious in creating layers as well as multiple perspectives on its timeline.
Most of the recording feels awkward, it tries to reveal information in order for audience's benefit, like Social Network. As the killing becomes well known the situation escalates, creating more perspectives from many other characters, most are delivered with the same found footage style. This becomes convoluted and restricted, as too many accounts are choppily edited for shock effect. At some points it becomes too fervor in delivering its message, it literally screams at audience. While it could be effective, V for Vendetta and Dark Knight films have done better with subtler method.
Its strong point lies in the visual. The graphic is crisp and pristine, the scenes are very polished, which makes the mockumentary style more confining. It could have portrayed the scenes with poise, and links them together smoothly. For the acting, its main characters perform well, especially John Doe himself. Characterization has a few problems though, they might be one-dimensional and the plot exaggerates John Doe's ability, dumbs down the law and vilifies his victims till the point of Satan incarnation himself.
This film might make audience contemplate on its theme, if so it has already succeeded, but the means for that goal is crude, almost preachy. It could have reached out more with elegant, delicate and rich discussion.
The title is pretty self-explanatory, this is the story of a vigilante called John Doe, who kills repeated offenders. Unlike most movies, it's presented in almost exclusively in cameras' point of view, such as recorded interviews, homemade video or CCTV. This semi-mockumentary approach does have its merit, it's easier to produce participation for viewers as though they are watching news or investigative journalism. Unfortunately, it's a tad too ambitious in creating layers as well as multiple perspectives on its timeline.
Most of the recording feels awkward, it tries to reveal information in order for audience's benefit, like Social Network. As the killing becomes well known the situation escalates, creating more perspectives from many other characters, most are delivered with the same found footage style. This becomes convoluted and restricted, as too many accounts are choppily edited for shock effect. At some points it becomes too fervor in delivering its message, it literally screams at audience. While it could be effective, V for Vendetta and Dark Knight films have done better with subtler method.
Its strong point lies in the visual. The graphic is crisp and pristine, the scenes are very polished, which makes the mockumentary style more confining. It could have portrayed the scenes with poise, and links them together smoothly. For the acting, its main characters perform well, especially John Doe himself. Characterization has a few problems though, they might be one-dimensional and the plot exaggerates John Doe's ability, dumbs down the law and vilifies his victims till the point of Satan incarnation himself.
This film might make audience contemplate on its theme, if so it has already succeeded, but the means for that goal is crude, almost preachy. It could have reached out more with elegant, delicate and rich discussion.