May include spoilers:
I agree with a previous reviewer that the talents of a whole bunch of brilliant true actors were not displayed nearly as well as they should have been. There are various points where passionate stances are rendered in a manner that makes one wonder about the director's choice as to which take should have been submitted to the editor.
Charles Dance's performance was, as always, impeccable, which, unfortunately, lead to a perceptible imbalance when the chosen takes revealed that both Robert Carlyle and Kerry Fox, though both are accomplished actors with resumees that are ample proof of their ability, simply were not delivering their best.
For anyone with experience of life in Australia, it's an important story in the history of judicial fair treatment but this movie comes across as only a half effort to be true to its inspiration. It's as if the director had lost interest at various points along the way.
In the best of all cinematic worlds, another go at this, with all of the original actors and a new director--especially one who might have known the late Craig Lahiff, who I'm sure had the best of all intentions--would be a blessing to do justice to a far more significant event in Australia's history than this version represents.
There are issues here that deserve far more respectful treatment. Alone the idea of Rupert Murdoch as a white knight in service of justice for the underdog is such an explosive irony, not to mention that an immigrant solicitor manages to have a case heard by the British Privy Council, and on rejection, yet again by a Royal Commission. Please, same cast, new director.
Just to see what I mean, watch this movie.
I agree with a previous reviewer that the talents of a whole bunch of brilliant true actors were not displayed nearly as well as they should have been. There are various points where passionate stances are rendered in a manner that makes one wonder about the director's choice as to which take should have been submitted to the editor.
Charles Dance's performance was, as always, impeccable, which, unfortunately, lead to a perceptible imbalance when the chosen takes revealed that both Robert Carlyle and Kerry Fox, though both are accomplished actors with resumees that are ample proof of their ability, simply were not delivering their best.
For anyone with experience of life in Australia, it's an important story in the history of judicial fair treatment but this movie comes across as only a half effort to be true to its inspiration. It's as if the director had lost interest at various points along the way.
In the best of all cinematic worlds, another go at this, with all of the original actors and a new director--especially one who might have known the late Craig Lahiff, who I'm sure had the best of all intentions--would be a blessing to do justice to a far more significant event in Australia's history than this version represents.
There are issues here that deserve far more respectful treatment. Alone the idea of Rupert Murdoch as a white knight in service of justice for the underdog is such an explosive irony, not to mention that an immigrant solicitor manages to have a case heard by the British Privy Council, and on rejection, yet again by a Royal Commission. Please, same cast, new director.
Just to see what I mean, watch this movie.