C_R_Saxby
Joined Jun 2016
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings41
C_R_Saxby's rating
Reviews17
C_R_Saxby's rating
This is one of the poorest historical docs I've ever had the displeasure of watching.
From the get-go, the talking heads involved (relatively unknown authors and academics) launch into seemingly complex discussions of highly equivocal historical artifacts and events two millenia old without clearly delineating their central thesis, frequently failing to say where they've obtained their data and/or evidence. The only thing allowing the viewer to ascertain the reason behind their incredibly non-empirical, debatable statements and interpretations is the title of the doc itself, leading one to surmise that - at some point - their discussions would culminate in a novel, grand conclusion regarding Christ as a social construction; a fictional concept woven together in the minds of the masses throughout the centuries based on a confluence of historical forces, including: Greek history and philosophy, Pagan practices, Egyptian mythology, and the like.
While some of the synthesis is admittedly somewhat intriguing, none of it was new or particularly earth-shatrering, at least in this armchair historian's estimation.
In short: A veritable disjointed mishmash of questionable historical analyses attempting to explain the concept of Christ beyond the historical persona depicted in the Bible. An interesting topic, to be sure, but one that could have been broached so, so much better.
From the get-go, the talking heads involved (relatively unknown authors and academics) launch into seemingly complex discussions of highly equivocal historical artifacts and events two millenia old without clearly delineating their central thesis, frequently failing to say where they've obtained their data and/or evidence. The only thing allowing the viewer to ascertain the reason behind their incredibly non-empirical, debatable statements and interpretations is the title of the doc itself, leading one to surmise that - at some point - their discussions would culminate in a novel, grand conclusion regarding Christ as a social construction; a fictional concept woven together in the minds of the masses throughout the centuries based on a confluence of historical forces, including: Greek history and philosophy, Pagan practices, Egyptian mythology, and the like.
While some of the synthesis is admittedly somewhat intriguing, none of it was new or particularly earth-shatrering, at least in this armchair historian's estimation.
In short: A veritable disjointed mishmash of questionable historical analyses attempting to explain the concept of Christ beyond the historical persona depicted in the Bible. An interesting topic, to be sure, but one that could have been broached so, so much better.
If there's ever been a film deserving of an exact 5/10 rating, it's 'Mistrial.' This movie failed to wow me in any way, nor did it make me want to turn it off at any point. The script, while totally unrealistic and unbelievable, was brought to moderate life by the average acting abilities of Pullman, et al., at least enough to keep my half-closed eyes peering at the screen until the credits rolled.
If you want to throw something on in the background while you paint your toenails or floss your teeth, throw this film on. But if you're looking for a scintillating example of fine American courtroom drama, keep walking. This movie was only slightly more intellectually engrossing than Pullman's other 90's hit: Spaceballs.
If you want to throw something on in the background while you paint your toenails or floss your teeth, throw this film on. But if you're looking for a scintillating example of fine American courtroom drama, keep walking. This movie was only slightly more intellectually engrossing than Pullman's other 90's hit: Spaceballs.
Like the documentarians weaving together this tall true-crime tale, I desperately wanted to believe that all the coincidences and correlations presented would culminate in some grandiose, never-before-seen, signifjcant conclusion, the makings of an excellent film. Alas, while I give the filmmakers credit for presenting old, readily-avilable information in a new and digestible - at times even entertaining - way, I can't help but feel they lacked even a cursory knowledge of human psychology and bias (particularly the confirmation type) along with the various forms of self-delusionment and denial one can fall prey to in pursuit of an important goal. The shots were pretty and the California scenery were pleasing enough, but they just didn't make up for the lack of deep analysis and insight one expects from such an endeavour. I feel terribly for the abuses and horrendous events the three women most prominently displayed in this docuseries were subjected to for sure. But as this is a website dedicated to the honest evaluation of film, I have to be authentic here and give this one a genuinee sub-par rating. Maybe their underlying premise was correct, but I just don't see a smoking gun.
Recently taken polls
1 total poll taken