Reviews

This remake takes place entirely in the court room. This is a much harder challenge for an actor... you really can blow it with one line as everything that occurs and transpires on the ship is brought out under testimony only.

I actually like the fact that the remake took the more challenging route and tried to get the same point across using the court room. They did not fail, in fact, this is a great movie on its own and if no one knew about the 1954 version of this film, it still stands on its own merits as fine attempt of filmmaking that can easily hold itself up based entirely on its own volition.

As consumer of stories and entertainment, I felt I was being given a gift to watch both films and not have the same thing repeated in each movie. It felt like a package, that I got to enjoy for 4 hours, seeing the story from differing perspectives. Thank you to the creators for the original attempt, it really stands on its own and it adds to the original rather than trying to replace it. Those hungry for story get a treat to find out there is 2 more hours of the same storyline. This was great and I wish more filmmakers did this when remaking a classic as this is the best way to pay tribute to a well-made movie.

All the actors in the remake did a remarkable job, it is the good acting that holds up this picture and makes it stand on its own legs. In fact, I feel the new film was extremely ambitious and could have very easily ended in disaster. In the original, Jose Ferrer steals the show, followed by the villain, Fred MacMurray (defense lawyer, writer). It would have been very difficult to top these two.

Keifer Sutherland, and Monica Raymund both deserve the top prize for their performances, I can't tell which one I think is better... I think Sutherland's performances was more technical, the contrast really had to be shown and this could have gone disastrously wrong if not done properly, hell if done averagely, it would have subtracted from the entire experience as the entire movie only works by seeing the contrast.

Jayson Clarke did an amazing job, but how could he top Jose Ferrer from the original? Ferrer came in the last quarter of the classic with stage presence of the only adult in the room, he oozed nobility, honour and a strong sense of justice. There was no question about it. Clarke's role in this is a little different, in my opinion he can't overshadow the performance of the man playing Queeg. Quite the wire act for a defense lawyer. So, he has to be good but not too good, otherwise we do not get to feel the same impact when Queeg actually breaks down on the stand. In the classic, Ferrer can steal the show as we already saw Queeg's conduct during the telling of the story. The breakdown in the court room does not need to be as pivotal, and indeed it is not. This means you need a stage veteran to play this role.

I give this movie a 10 out of 10 just as I give all the movies I review, always a 10. The reason is that filmmaking is no joke. It is closer to the art of black magic than to some canned formula or a recipe. What worked once before may never work again. The effort and the commitment and dare I say it, luck, to pull it all together is often like throwing dice at a roulette table. Even the best of the best, when loaded with talent and money can easily make a stinker. The chemistry and connections between actors and the framing of that chemistry is quite the elusive and enduring goal; so easy to stumble before the finish line. So easy to make a mistake that erases existing progress. So, when I see any production that allows me to escape my own reality for 2 hours, I am as giddy as a schoolboy on graduation day. Thankful, and excited to see more.

Everyone needs to watch this documentary. The situation is presented plainly and the family has specialists that have the experience and qualifications to back up their treatment and diagnosis, but Jon Hopkins Hospital seems to over rule these cases, sometimes doing as little as 10 minute interview for due diligence. These folks were in hospital care going doctor to doctor to find someone that could help with their child's condition, and when they do and when they find a treatment that works. They are overruled because the mother in this case is a nurse and very push about her daughter getting the proper care. You can easily see how egos get into a tug of war and must win at all costs, however those costs are the trauma of a child, of family and the unfortunately the fight pushes one of the parties to depression and eventual suicide. Time and time again the egos portray this woman as a villain, not only to the courts, but also to her captive daughter, and you can just see how even the most sane person can eventually lose their sanity and in the end the egos do the ultimate damage. Why were the specialists who have spent months and years with the patient ignored over persons that only viewed these folks for a short duration? That is what maddens me here. I understand protection of kids, and the need for this, but why was Dr Killpatricks diagnosis ignored when he was and expert on CPRS? Why did the Hospital bill the insurance company for CPRS treatments when at the same time they called the mother unstable and crazy for insisting that her daughter has CPRS? There are so many problems in this case that the only way that Jon Hopkins will look into changing and being more diligent is by the Kowalskis getting an incredibly large settlement. Anything less will just allow them to continue to sweep the broken engagements under the rug. There seems to be more concern about ignoring and putting your hand in the sand, than actually looking at these cases with more scrutiny and less bias. Why is it easier for them to act as if they did nothing wrong, when the patient, the family and the experts all say the opposite? How is this a functional system? Who is it protecting?

EDIT:

So I have re-investigated the other side and see the others feel this is a one sided documentary that does not show the realities of this case. That ketamine treatments are usually given in small doses 20mg to 100 mg at the most, and in Maya's case Beata was insistent on getting a 1000mg dosage. This made the JH staff concerned and they questioned if the mother does this all the time and just goes to Mexico for these injections, as it was admitted that at one point Dr. Kirkpatrick's treatments were getting to be too expensive and they started to seek another doctor to get the same therapy at reduced rates. So I can see how the medical staff at JH did not understand the diagnosis, but even then, that is a problem with Dr. Kirkpatrick not Beata who is just doing what she has seen as working in the past for her daughter. In the end the grievance here is that CPS unfairly said that Maya was being abused by her mother, family and they treated Beata as if she was the problem without explaining why Kirkpatricks diagnosis was being ignored. The other aspect that I looked into was that he ketemine treatments dont always work outside of Kirkpatrick's office, and the reason he gives for that is that the other doctors do not understand that the dosage must be high INITIALLY, within the first 3 days it is important to have a high ketamine dosage and after that you can use the lower dosages. This happens a lot in chemistry, as there may be an active barrier or a buffering situation that must be breached before a medicine actually works. Seems Dr. Kirkpatrick has a lot of experience in CPRS and know the ins and outs of ketamine and one of the reasons the others are not getting the same results is because they do not understand that the high dosage is only an initial loading, not a constant daily treatment.

I still have to give the benefit of the doubt to Kirkpatrick here as there are no credible posts I have read why he is a quack, other than the high dosage of ketamine, yet he seems to have enough success with the treatment that it can't be denied that there may be something to it.

Again if the problem was with Dr, Kirkpatrick why was the law so focused on Beata and why was she vilified when all she was doing was what a mother normally does. Use the treatment that works the best for their child.

It just seems that CPS took some personal biases and some egos were wounded when Beate was being stubborn by insisting on the treatment. Seems that no one was able to explain it to her to her benefit as to why Kirkpatrick was wrong when she clearly saw his style of treatment working.

I am not going to change my ratting of 10, still feel JH is on hook here, because there obviously seems to be a problem with refocusing and re-assessing the situation, instead they only saw one villain and that was the child's mother and that drove her to suicide.