Denial (2016)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

The Worst Film Ever

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

I don't necessarily agree with the views on either side of the true-story here .. but this movie being more propaganda than true-story/drama made it unwatchable for me 20 minutes in. If they had made this more true to life it could have been a great film. Instead they made the author a goofy-looking, bumbling idiot (which he is not) and the leading character an attractive heroine ... obviously intended to shape people's opinions of the story and people involved. Too bad.

It's strange to say this, but "Denial" is Timothy Spall's movie. Strange because the movie is based a book by American historian Deborah Lipstadt on the libel trial launched by British amateur historian David Irving against herself and Penguin Books. Irving was played by Spall. The trial was launched because Irving claimed that Lipstadt had libelled him in a book she had written. Irving was a Holocaust denier, and Lipstadt a Jewish academic who specialized in the Holocaust. Given that the movie is based on Lipstadt's book you expect her to be the focal point, but Irving - in spite of his noxious anti-semitic views - was really the more compelling character, largely because of how well Spall did with the part. Rachel Weisz took on the part of Lipstadt. She was fine in the role, but outshone by Spall.After an opening encounter between the two in Atlanta, where Lipstadt was speaking, most of the movie is set in a British courtroom. You do learn some of the finer points in British law - such as that in the UK it's the defendant in a libel trial that has to prove the case. Irving launched the case in the UK for that very reason. You also see in Lipstadt just a wee bit of the "ugly American" from time to time - such as her refusal to bow to the judge when her trial begins, because- as she said - "I'm an American." Maybe - but too bad. You're in a British court! (She did bow to the judge eventually.) There are some ugly anti-semitic demonstrations portrayed outside the courtroom.The presentation of the case by Lipstadt's legal team is fairly dry and technical. It's interesting from a historical perspective - but you really have to have an interest in history to appreciate some of the finer points. I do have a Bachelors degree in history, so found it interesting to watch as Lipstadt's legal team and various witnesses pull Irving's views apart. But I would say that overall the movie isn't especially engrossing. It's a good movie. It's an important subject. Even aside from the Holocaust, it does deal with the question of when and whether there should be limits on freedom of speech. It's certainly worth watching, but it's certainly not an American-style courtroom drama filled with suspense. (6/10)

Denial didn't really keep my attention.It ended up being a court case about a difference in opinion. It was also very heavy-handed in what it wanted you to feel about the holocaust, as if you actually had to emphasise who's side you should be on during the movie.Round this off with a terrible performance/accent off Rachel Weisz in the lead role and the bland brown/grey of the whole movie and I'm not rushing back to watch this any time soon.

It's a movie you see, because these types of movies always like to watch them, but it does not come at any time to be a good movie, even if it's not bad.The first problem I encounter is that Timothy Spall did not believe me, it's like a caricature and that leaves him credible. Otherwise, the rest of the actors are fine.It is not a good movie of judgments and there are times when it is thick. There are times when you do not know where you are going.I think the visit to the concentration camp is just to create sentimentality.The photograph has good moments, has moments in which it is very beautiful and transmits, but then when it illuminates through a window, it puts too much light and it spoils it.the director is normal, does not make nice plans or narrates but at least not bored.It is a movie that if it did not have these actors, would go unnoticed