Separate from the review itself, I would quickly like to address one of the worst taglines of any film in recent memory.
“The whole world knows the Holocaust happened. Now she needs to prove it.”
Now, I’m well aware that taglines are a cheap and rarely clever form of marketing and have no bearing on the movie’s actual quality, but c’mon. The first three words are a classic example of generalization that would drive any tenth grade English teacher mad and worse, it’s a blatant contradiction of the plot of the movie itself — if the whole world knew then there would not be a trial over it, now would there?
Furthermore, “Now (insert name/pronoun) needs to (insert verb)” is the most generic, cringe-inducing marketing line ever thought up. It’s a blatant and unoriginal attempt at vaguely catching the interest of viewers with a contrived sense of tension.
On with the review.
Denial, directed by British filmmaker Mick Jackson and starring established Hollywood vets Rachel Weisz, Tom Wilkinson and Timothy Spall, is a film based on the true story of Holocaust-denier David Irving’s lawsuit against acclaimed writer and historian Deborah Lipstadt on the basis of libel against his work and his character. Taking place over the course of nearly half a decade, the story follows the two opposing sides from Irving’s earliest legal proceedings in the mid-1990s through the final verdict in April of 2000. The trial and its outcome were not only significant in their important historical ties, but in the precedent they set with regards to the UK’s incredibly strict libel laws.
With engaging source material, a quality director and writer at the helm, Denial could have very well been one of the better courtroom dramas in recent memory. Jackson and screenwriter David Hare’s work, however, lacked the emotional punch on both the micro (personal) and macro (societal; historical) level to rise above the level of forgettably mediocre.
While the film’s putting forth of the trial’s objective facts was not inherently flawed and avoided the common pitfalls of over-dramatization, the attention to detail that needs to accompany such a complicated story was notably lacking. It was quite clear that Jackson and company completely overlooked the passage of time over the course of the story, as Irving, Lipstadt and her legal team had changed very little to none — both in terms of physical features, personality and maturity — between 1996 and 2000. The film’s pacing was also inconsistent with the time frame, as important events were often overlooked while smaller less significant scenes would seemingly at random be given inordinate amounts of screen time. Minus the glaring and frequent reminders of a scene’s setting, there was nothing even remotely indicating that the events had not taken place over the course of four months as opposed to four years. With such a star-studded cast, the last thing movie-goers are worried about is the performances will be lackluster and unconvincing, and that in large part was the case. Tom Wilkinson’s (defense attorney Richard Rampton) typically benevolent and good-willed demeanor clashed with the smug arrogance of Spall (Irving) perfectly in the film’s main character conflict, and the heights of their courtroom battles were far more interesting than anything else going on over the 110-minute runtime.
Deborah Lipstadt, on the other hand, fell totally flat as a sympathetic and relatable character. Rachel Weisz’ performance was competent at best (and at worst), but the real failings could be found in the writing department, as she seemed to be more of an innocent bystander than an active participant in the trial. In scenes when she was put on the spot regarding her legal and historical knowledge, she came across as terribly inferior to her peers, an overly-emotional amateur in a room full of pragmatic experts. And while the writers tried to engage her in the plot through a budding chemistry with Wilkinson, they were far overshadowed by the more memorable tension between he and Spall.
Denial was neither particularly good nor bad, but ultimately a forgettable experience. The framework for a decent courtroom drama were certainly in place, but on most fronts the execution was absent and will leave most viewers looking for their two hours back. But hey, at least it’s inarguably better than that slogan.
Two stars (out of five).
