There are a few issues with this terrible movie - not to mention I won't get that 1+ hour of my life back.
Story -----
The story is so superficial that they completely left out major parts of her life and turning points in her career. The fact that they left out the best role and major turning point of her life (8 Mile) is completely mind boggling.
They literally took a five paragraph news article about her life and death and put it on screen point-by-point like a checklist. There was no real narrative in the movie, including her husband's checkered past as a footnote, which may have been the reason she made a lot of the later decisions of her life.
Actors ------
The main actors were completely miscast and not able to bring us into believing that they were who they were supposed to be. On top of that, they wore the worst wigs ever and every time I looked at their faces all I saw was the bad wigs.
This leads us to the heart of the matter:
Director --------
The director did not have the foresight to see, direct, or prevent any of the above problems. There was no real narrative other than a point form list of things to show in the movie, without some of the major points forgotten.
I realize it can be hard to squeeze a whole life into a TV movie, but they could have spent a lot less time on some of the things they showed in the movie.
This was a by-the-numbers biography that looked like it could have been a documentary re-enactment rather than a true drama.
The fact that they put a footnote at the end about Simon's death, which should have been integral to the story is a crime that no director should ever commit. The fact that he died in the same place and manner as his wife only a few short months later points to the fact that he was heartbroken and possibly afflicted with whatever killed her.
Story -----
The story is so superficial that they completely left out major parts of her life and turning points in her career. The fact that they left out the best role and major turning point of her life (8 Mile) is completely mind boggling.
They literally took a five paragraph news article about her life and death and put it on screen point-by-point like a checklist. There was no real narrative in the movie, including her husband's checkered past as a footnote, which may have been the reason she made a lot of the later decisions of her life.
Actors ------
The main actors were completely miscast and not able to bring us into believing that they were who they were supposed to be. On top of that, they wore the worst wigs ever and every time I looked at their faces all I saw was the bad wigs.
This leads us to the heart of the matter:
Director --------
The director did not have the foresight to see, direct, or prevent any of the above problems. There was no real narrative other than a point form list of things to show in the movie, without some of the major points forgotten.
I realize it can be hard to squeeze a whole life into a TV movie, but they could have spent a lot less time on some of the things they showed in the movie.
This was a by-the-numbers biography that looked like it could have been a documentary re-enactment rather than a true drama.
The fact that they put a footnote at the end about Simon's death, which should have been integral to the story is a crime that no director should ever commit. The fact that he died in the same place and manner as his wife only a few short months later points to the fact that he was heartbroken and possibly afflicted with whatever killed her.