The acting was very good but the movie was way too boring. The characters were very simple, the protagonist was too good, the antagonist was too bad, from the beggining you know Richard is absolutely inocent and however hard they try there´s no way they´ll get him to jail. The mesagge of the film might be good, although a little cliché, but the plot needs something else than a good mesagge.
shareThe plot lacked? It was a true story. what more could they have done?
shareLess plot wholes
sharePlot hole. Not plot whole.
shareDude this movie has plot wholes
shareI am not sure if you are being sarcastic or not.
My point is there is no such thing as a plot whole. The phrase you want is plot hole. That is, a hole in the plot.
I haven't seen this yet so I have no opinion on any plot holes. I'm just seeing many people using the incorrect term.
to me it´s not enough with just having a true story. Its seems like you can make any decision in a film and just say "sorry that's what really happened". Thats what I don't like about films based on real stories, in a normal one you would have to choose the things that happen with a purpose, in these ones you just say sorry mate that's what happened. if I wanted to just watch a real story I would watch a documentary.
shareI TEND TO AGREE WITH YOU.
shareThey could have not made it.
shareWhy even watch it if the fact that you already know the outcome is such a drawback?
shareA lot of people didn't know... the original accusation got big play. When the truth finally came out there was much less interest. People had moved on. Many still think he did it.
It's good that the truth is finally spreading more widely.
Which "many" still think he did it, after Eric Rudolph confessed to planting the bomb?
shareGo and ask a few people in the street. Say "Remember that Richard Jewell guy who planted the bomb at the Atlanta Olympics? He got out of prison now. What do you think of that?" and see what kind of responses you get. Or at the next Thanksgiving dinner.
share"from the beggining you know Richard is absolutely inocent and however hard they try there´s no way they´ll get him to jail"
That was a historical fact..
If I see a movie about Lincoln, I know Booth shoots him in the end.
You probably don't like James Bond movies. They are all the same. He sleeps with at least two women, gets info from one, falls in love with the other for two hours, and saves the world.
Eastwood films are typically "flat" and low key (I've always found that ironic considering he's such an action-hero icon)
He likes the actors to tell the story with their performances, and avoids pervasive background music or pretty cinematography.
If there's a problem with this film, it's in the character of Jewell himself, who plays it all low energy and passive until close to the end. But that's on purpose - it's built into the character and for all I know was how the real Jewell was as well.
Sam Rockwell carried the film, by design.
I don't personally see any of that as negative, BTW
Well we already knew he was innocent in real life, so hard to get around that.
But he did fit the profile -- wannabe cop right wing gun nut, poor social skills and lived with his mother. But the movie made him into a real person -- raised with good values, a strong desire to do his job well and help people, but not very bright and too trusting.