Manhunt

Interesting accompanying program to Fincher's Mindhunter. A closed series about the period just before / after the capture of Unabomber, which is quite contradictory in terms that there is something "negative" about every pros (and there are many of them). The first thing which seems strange to me is that at a time when the difference between film and series production is becoming blur, you will unmistakably rank this among the cheap television series from the 1990s. Even the local offices look like Potemkin village and not real spaces. Furthermore, it is too ambitious. It will not be satisfied purely with the procedural level of investigation, but much more than you would expect it will plunge into the department of psychoanalysis and anti-system philosophies. Which is nice, but the film makers will stay halfway so they devote considerable space to it, but they tend to explain it to the viewer semi-pathetically as at school. On top of that it´s too concise, the characters tend to recite the obvious facts using explanatory monologues pretending to explain that to other characters but in fact explaining for the viewer" (as if Discovery still wanted to educate its audience with an educational program even in drama), the supporting characters are seldom so flat and out of duty (especially the partner aspires to be the most useless, annoying and worst written and played character in recent years, an unwanted attempt to portray tough emancipated woman in a man´s world. The concept of two time layers then works by far the worst of all the series where it has appeared in recent years. Nor is the structure distinct; sometimes procedural movie, sometime a court drama, sometime tough documentary, sometimes thrileroid fiction about a cat and a mouse, sometimes this, sometimes that. And then there's Sam Worthington in the lead role. I can´t say it´s a weak point, but such an infinitely grateful multi-layered role (which has basically the same development and nature as Ford in the aforementioned Mindhunter) clearly called for a better performance. Significantly better. Especially when the opponent is Paul Bettany, whose every good performance is followed by an inappropriately excessive one, but I doubt that he has ever been so good and captivatingly charismatic so far. Which means something, because he has already many memorable roles under his belt. And last but not least, the simple fact that the case of Unabomber, his ideas and "career" are so interesting all alone that they overwhelm most of the above-mentioned drawbacks. As a result, it´s more interesting than good, but at the same time so interesting that it's really good, especially in the two final episodes. (2017.12.19)