pawebster

It's a fitting memorial to the terrible ordeal of Nazanin and her family and a tribute to the campaign waged by Richard and supporters. As a film, it suffers from the fact that the story is essentially simple and the outcome well known, so there is little tension. Also Joseph Fiennes plays Richard in a competent conventional way - i.e. As a frustrated, angry but still controlled man - but fails to capture the special nature of Richard Ratcliffe, who, through it all (it alwaysy seemed to me) radiated a brand of humanity of his own, almost a sweetness, which was moving in a way that doesn't quite come across here.

This film is full of anachronistic gaffes. One of the worst is the police in London demanding driving licence and "papers" as if they were the Gestapo. UK citizens didn't and so far still don't have to carry "papers". (The police can require drivers to produce paperwork at a police station within a week.) Hamilton not having those items would have been normal. Public buildings were black with soot in those days and there was a lot of war damage in 1950s' London. There is no sign of any of that here, nor of the freezing weather that Christmas - at least we should be able to see people's breath in the cold Abbey. I could go on and on. Writers and directors: do your research and don't try to depict what you can't manage.

I had looked forward to this. It should have been my cup of tea. In fact it's not much more better than an episode of Midsomer Murders, just with bigger names and a higher budget. It isn't thrilling and dramatic. It isn't tantalisingly mysterious and satisfying when solved. OK. OK. That leaves comedy, and I think that's what it was probably aiming for, but all it manages is to be slightly amusing at times. Worst of all it's twee. A bit cringy.