Change Your Image
dan-190
Reviews
Sophie: A Murder in West Cork (2021)
What about the forensics?
This documentary was overall well done, clearly exposing the person who committed the murder of Sophie Toscan Du Plantier. It was very helpful to include her family in the interviews.
There were several missing aspects to the story that I wish were included. First, it would have been helpful to have interviewed Jules. However my guess is that she was intimidated by the suspect and feared retribution.
Secondly, interviewing the forensic pathologist who did the autopsy would also have been helpful. What were the specific findings? Did they collect samples from the perineum, the mouth, the fingernails, etc.? Did they save the clothing she wore that night? DNA profiling was first used in 1987 in Florida. Surely the pathologist was aware of that forensic test even if they weren't using it. By saving clothing, etc., the testing could've been done later.
Lastly, how was the crime scene managed? Did they cordon off the path to the the house as well as the house itself? Did they look through out the house, looking for stains, hairs, finger prints and use Luminol to document the presence of blood inside? Did they check in detail the thorny bush for blood??? So many unanswered questions.
Locard's Principle used in forensic studies states, 'everything leaves a trace'. Was this the exception to that rule?? A miscarriage of justice for Sophie and her family.
Being There (1979)
Emotionally flat.
Having just watched the movie, Being There, for the first time, I was surprised to read so many varied comments about the movie. The diversity of opinion from great admiration to boredom reminded me of a group of art admirers standing in front of a painting depicting a small central dot on a large white canvas. Some see the meaning of life in the dot, and the others see a waste of canvas. I am afraid I am with the latter group. The character Chauncey Gardener was so flat emotionally, that if emotion could be measured on an EKG, he would be declared emotionally dead. If the lead character doesn't generate any interest on my part from the beginning it then affects the whole movie. That lead character doesn't have to be likeable or nice. Hannibal Lector was not a nice character but Hopkins does such a great job with him that you want to follow him thru out the movie. Many mention Forrest Gump as a sequel to this movie, but Hanks makes the character of Gump a more interesting person, with more substance, and a range of emotional aspects that make Gump someone you are interested in from the very beginning. After that it just was impossible to believe that so many people he met in the movie would accept this man as they did. And equally impossible to believe that Maclaine's character would actually be physically attracted to him! At times, as an aside, there were images more of Chaplin, rather then Laurel. The clothes, the stances, the mute qualities were very reminiscent of him. The last scene, which may seem clever by the author and director, clouded up the whole movie for me. Whether this was a reference to Chauncey as a Jesus-like person, with parables, a father figure suggesting God, coming at a difficult time in history, providing sage guidance, and walking on water, or, it was a child-like symbol where he walks on water because of his innocence, seems like poppy cock to me. If it was the latter, how many kids drown each year because they too don't know they can't walk on water or should fear it, and Chauncey as a human couldn't defy physics by walking on water. The scene was clever but confusing.