In contrast to some of the other reviewers here, I thought this film did cross the line, and joined the very exploiters it was assailing. But it was close.
The tone of the film is quite strange, from the excellent albeit over-the-top comedy of Alfred Molina, to the action-paced adventure of most scenes involving a car, to the criminal psychological relationship of the newsman and his prey, or is that vice versa? The film feels like "Salvador" in parts, but this film refuses to adopt a true hero. That is its best challenge, and its potential undoing.
Speaking of inconsistencies, Damian Alcazar's portrayal of the accused Bible salesmen is also quite a puzzle. His facial quirks during delivery were most of the time contradictory to what he was saying, but not always. Was it slyness, or just schizophrenia, or the actor trying hard to deliver what I assume the director wanted, a character that may be sinner or saint.
I think there are easier ways to portray both, but not when you have the lurid tinge of pedophilia lingering throughout the film. Thus the film is quite brutal in content, and for many, that should serve as a warning to skip this film. No one could "enjoy" the film for the effect of that tinge permeating one's consciousness...
Similarly the second scene involving Alcazar as the Bible salesmen is a very tough watch for vigilante justice gone awry, although the crowning achievement of the film (evidently incorporating footage also from one of the actors playing a camera man as well, there's a nice fifth wall.) Of course that second scene is placed there both for fact's sake evidently from what I've read, as well as for the sake of fiction and blurring our view of that salesman. That view, as it is shoved around from the very first scene on, I think is what most drove my feeling of being exploited.
So that presents the great challenge of this film, that I think frustrated the filmmaker as well as me. Hence the alternate ending provided with the DVD. The ending not chosen closes the story more which, the film demanded for some of the reasons above, but I can see why the other ending was chosen. Underscoring that this story does not end, on both sides of the exploitational line, is crucial.
And now back to the old, cheap theater of the "News"...
The tone of the film is quite strange, from the excellent albeit over-the-top comedy of Alfred Molina, to the action-paced adventure of most scenes involving a car, to the criminal psychological relationship of the newsman and his prey, or is that vice versa? The film feels like "Salvador" in parts, but this film refuses to adopt a true hero. That is its best challenge, and its potential undoing.
Speaking of inconsistencies, Damian Alcazar's portrayal of the accused Bible salesmen is also quite a puzzle. His facial quirks during delivery were most of the time contradictory to what he was saying, but not always. Was it slyness, or just schizophrenia, or the actor trying hard to deliver what I assume the director wanted, a character that may be sinner or saint.
I think there are easier ways to portray both, but not when you have the lurid tinge of pedophilia lingering throughout the film. Thus the film is quite brutal in content, and for many, that should serve as a warning to skip this film. No one could "enjoy" the film for the effect of that tinge permeating one's consciousness...
Similarly the second scene involving Alcazar as the Bible salesmen is a very tough watch for vigilante justice gone awry, although the crowning achievement of the film (evidently incorporating footage also from one of the actors playing a camera man as well, there's a nice fifth wall.) Of course that second scene is placed there both for fact's sake evidently from what I've read, as well as for the sake of fiction and blurring our view of that salesman. That view, as it is shoved around from the very first scene on, I think is what most drove my feeling of being exploited.
So that presents the great challenge of this film, that I think frustrated the filmmaker as well as me. Hence the alternate ending provided with the DVD. The ending not chosen closes the story more which, the film demanded for some of the reasons above, but I can see why the other ending was chosen. Underscoring that this story does not end, on both sides of the exploitational line, is crucial.
And now back to the old, cheap theater of the "News"...