Hoax: The Kidnapping of Sherri Papini

I've been looking forward to seeing this since it was first announced that it was a hoax. I smelled it when it first happened, I knew that the story Sherry Papini told was completely implausible. I don't ever expect Oscar level performances from TV movies, but Jamie King's performance was so awful, it was distracting. Josh Collins as Keith Papini was okay, but he overacted the "borderline abusive husband" role to such a degree that it ruined any sense of sympathy for him, when in reality, I felt that the real Keith was the true victim in this whole story. I thought the actress who played the investigator did a decent job, but otherwise, the only excuse I think of for how badly the movie was as a whole, was that it must have been directed by a seventh grader. Such a disappointment.

I was pretty excited to watch this film. Like much of America, I was fascinated by this bizarre, true story we witnessed in the news. Disappointingly this lifetime production was a. Dull retelling.

Even being based on a true story, it is typical in such films that liberties are taken, parts are exaggerated, and facts are changed. However, it seemed that this was unnecessarily done here; and worse, doing so actually took away from the story, rather than adding to it, as is usually intended.

For instance, legitimate details in the interviews and conversations we see/are all privy to online were altered, which made me question more of the film itself...and including them would've actually made the production more interesting!

I found Jamie King, the woman who portrayed Sherri, pretty dull and monotone, though she did at times capture Sherri's anxiety, deflection, and manipulative behavior.

There were a few times where some scenes were rushed or perhaps overedited, which only exacerbated viewer confusion AND boredom. It seemed apparent that this film had little-to-no cooperation from those actually involved In the ordeal. I'm sure that not many were cooperative, most especially Sherri herself, but it seemed so impersonal and amateurly crafted. There were moments where it was lightly comedic, and of course sad in theory, but even then and overall It lacked real soul. There is debate about whether or not the husband was at all aware before the conclusion of the investigation, but certainly their kids weren't; yet I found it difficult to be very sympathetic to anyone here.

The whole story/format felt rushed, and dare I say- after four+ years of that ridiculous case- even rushed to the screen. Like it felt a bit premature. I found the 1.5-hour recording of the concluding police interview online to be more intriguing than this movie of the same length. Perhaps after more time, those personally involved would be a bit more informative, thereby providing a more detailed telling, about which we could muster more understanding and compassion/empathy. Instead, I was actually ready for it to end.

I'm "okay" with a bad made for tv movie. Because like, now we have a reference of a big deal simplified and dramatized in a compact 1.5 hours. It's bad, dont get me wrong... but you don't watch lifetime movies for the Oscar creds.

My issue comes down to production's irresponsible ignorance of the facts. Theres been a minimum of 5 docs about this case. We ALL KNOW she cut her hair. All her interviews were with her hair cut. ALSO the person that found her was a man, you can hear it in the 911 call. Im okay with dramatizing and taking certain liberties, but c'mon.. how does your art/HMU department overlook that? I'm just not a fan of entire projects greenlighted to have such important things overlooked. Lifetime, we know you arent quality entertainment, but why skimp on simple things?

What or whose perspective is this story? The public? The husband? The direction of the story appears to shift blame to an inattentive husband. He over reacts, underreacts, seems wooden- offish. She a woman described as 'perfect' 'vivacious', 'energetic' 'put together', is portrayed as someone who would be described as dull, disheveled, is conveyed so differently-"depressed, Bored, abused, on the verge of a breakdown?" There is little to no depiction of the torture her husband endured, nor is there empathy.

Don't waste your time.

It's not the acting as eluded to in a previous review. It's the story arc. There's no point of view, no empathy, & the personalities too off.

I came here to talk about what a tragedy this feeble LMN attempt at storytelling was, between the terrible acting and the universal blandness, but what you need to do is go look at the VERY comprehensive review from back on 2/19/23 by goodpatron23. They nailed EVERYTHING I had to say and then some - - and with almost-perfect grammar, etc., so I have nothing to add except like I said above -- don't bother. (It has been my experience that ever since Lifetime went Canadian, it has gone tremendously downhill in terms of quality with regard to Lifetime movies. I just don't think the CBC filmmaking standards are the same.)