Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
The Act of Not Buying into the Hype
28 January 2014
It's hard for me to comprehend the majority of praise this documentary has received. Yes it is different and at times uncomfortable to watch, but that doesn't mean it's great or even good.

For a film that is about actual political murders detailed by the murderers themselves, you wouldn't think it could be boring, but it was. I could barely get through the first 30 minutes and it never compelled my interest - I had to force myself to keep watching it. When you have a bunch of ignorant and ill-informed men self psycho-analyzing, using incorrect culture references and base human non-emotion to smugly explain or rationalize how and why they killed, and then to reenact the interrogations and murders in a cheapo Bollywood style, well it's ludicrous, not revolutionary. I mean if the message is that even morons can kill and in time film cheesy reenactments about it, then I guess I understood the message and then I asked, so what did that prove? The end scene, where one of the killers becomes ill for an extended period of time, might be looked at as redemptive, but even if perceived in that way it's out of place, message-wise, with the rest of the film.

From the reviews I read I thought there were going to be elaborate and amazingly bizarre and unique recreations of various crimes against humanity and from that I might learn something about the most terrible crimes against humanity. But the film's scope is not that historically vast and only a couple scenes have elaborately stylized the atrocities. Generally the recreations are mostly small scale, cheesy and repetitive. What is almost more distasteful than the actual historical killings themselves is the filmmaker's concept, asking the killers to recreate their crimes with such callous disrespect to the lives taken. Yes it may have been therapeutic for the participants (as if killers deserve therapy?) and all this is supposed to pass for brilliance? Brent Chastain - Top3Films.com
34 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Spoiler Review of the Ending
13 January 2014
Warning: Spoilers
The ending. That's what is commented on most and with good reason. Because the resolution is purposely ambiguous, it disappoints or frustrates many.

I think the ending, which does not stamp the seal of innocence or guilt upon Rachel, is appropriate to the story. The plot carefully builds two sides to Rachel's character. She is either the sweetest warmest person ever, or a fortune seeker where marriage and murderer are not out of the question. The story builds a strong case for both perspectives. This is the larger point of the story - it's about perceptions, communication and judgments humans make, that we sometimes have to make without the ability to determine the truth and the inherent danger in doing so. This is how life sometimes is - nowadays we call them gray areas. My Cousin Rachel it's not necessarily a mystery story that needs to be resolved, but more truly a comment on the folly of human interactions, especially where money and greed are involved.

Yet even if you demand a solid resolution, the ending should not be seen as a let-down. If you believe the story shows her guilt more prominently, then in the end you can argue that fate stepped in, (seconds too late) and justice was done - she paid with her life for murder, as the opening death scene foretold. On the other hand If you believe her innocent, then her murder can be explained in her extremely poor manner of showing and communicating her intentions, leaving highly bad impressions to those it mattered most.

I think my reading of the outcome is backed up by the fact then when the author of the novel was asked about the innocence of Rachael, she herself did not know. Solving the mystery was not the author's intention. Brent Chastain top3films.com
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed