In 2013, I saw a critically acclaimed documentary called "The Gatekeepers," which was an Israeli-made film about the Shin Bet - the Israeli version of America's FBI. However, the film was basically just a series of people looking into the camera and talking. This "talking heads" approach was boring, and I had to struggle to stay awake, even stopping it in the middle and watching it again the following day.
So watching "Disgraced," I felt that same way. I came into this picture wanting to learn more about this news story that happened less than 15 years ago, and left knowing little more, and barely able to keep my eyes open. In addition to the boring "talking heads" approach, it is fascinating that the filmmakers chose on their own volition at the end of the movie to indicate who did NOT participate in this movie, and that includes Baylor University, most of the players on the team that year, and most of the attorneys who worked the case. It could have been so much better if there was more buy-in from these other groups.
Also, I will admit that the most interesting part of the documentary was Dave Bliss's comments which he thought were off-the-record without the camera running. But I've also read that showing these comments was questionably ethical on the part of the filmmakers.
Finally, it's clear who the filmmakers want the audience to believe "really" did it, or at the very least, what needs to be explored much more thoroughly by law enforcement. However, I'm sure legally they had to be very careful about what they could say without being sued, so this potentially powerful statement was extremely watered down.
So watching "Disgraced," I felt that same way. I came into this picture wanting to learn more about this news story that happened less than 15 years ago, and left knowing little more, and barely able to keep my eyes open. In addition to the boring "talking heads" approach, it is fascinating that the filmmakers chose on their own volition at the end of the movie to indicate who did NOT participate in this movie, and that includes Baylor University, most of the players on the team that year, and most of the attorneys who worked the case. It could have been so much better if there was more buy-in from these other groups.
Also, I will admit that the most interesting part of the documentary was Dave Bliss's comments which he thought were off-the-record without the camera running. But I've also read that showing these comments was questionably ethical on the part of the filmmakers.
Finally, it's clear who the filmmakers want the audience to believe "really" did it, or at the very least, what needs to be explored much more thoroughly by law enforcement. However, I'm sure legally they had to be very careful about what they could say without being sued, so this potentially powerful statement was extremely watered down.