I’ve just about finished watching this movie, and I’ve been left feeling thoroughly confused. What was the director thinking when he based the movie in the period of the holocaust? The only character that seems to be connected with it is Kate Winslet’s. But the script never really explores her character that much. All we see are scattered glimpses of her in the trial and that in itself fails to bring out the emotion she was going through. And there was the part with the young Michael during the trial and the identity crisis he goes through. But that’s all stuff we have seen before. The novelty quotient wasnt there.
Or maybe I have missed the point altogether. Maybe it wasnt meant to focus on the holocaust and that the time period was just incidental. But then, was the point of the movie to explore the relationship between Michael and Hanna? Well it certainly leaves a lot to th audience to figure out. Maybe a little bit too subtle? It seems the director was trying too many different things and failed to pull all of them together.
Credit must still be given to Ralph Fiennes and Kate Winslet for their performances. Fiennes was sensational. Kate really came to life in the second part of the movie, but I have my doubts on whether she should have won an Oscar. I’ll have to watch the other movies that were nominated for best actress before I can comment on that.
Edit: Meryl Streep in Doubt is wayyyyyyyy better.
Invictus 