Waste of time

Better Late Then Never

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

It's tough to make you cringe at the right moment, or evoke a laugh or emotion at exactly the right time. Barry Levinson's been around long enough to master all that. Pacino is surprisingly good, which sounds stupid, but after years of taking crappy scripts it feels odd to see him give a convincing, subtle performance in a well-written film. You never quite figure him out until the end, but as with any great movie you are left the unanswerable questions. Was Kevorkian driven by hubris or heroism, or insanity, or morbid personality quirks? He's definitely a kook, but his grip on reality remains fairly solid. Maybe there is no difference in his case, and maybe his ghoulish interest in a world filled with cruelty and injustice drove him to see death as a right. Or maybe he is just doing what any conscientious doctor should be doing. Now if only they had picked a better name for the movie.

In the 90's, Dr. Jack Kevorkian need no introduction. His name was notorious. A subject of medical controversy, Dr. Kevorkian (Al Pacino) create a manner for people whom suffering from chronic disease, paralytic illness, and chemotherapy failure to die with some dignity and ease. However, it didn't come, without a few legal problems & some outrage from the public. His relationship with society, got so bad, that some news outlets started portraying him, as a serial killer, with the nickname 'Dr. Death'. Because of this, his story was never been properly told, until now. Directed by Barry Levinson & based on Neal Nicol's and Harry Wylie's novel, "Between the Dying and the Dead: Dr. Jack Kevorkian, the Assisted Suicide Machine and the Battle to Legalize Euthanasia", this HBO TV movie, hopes to explore, what makes the man ticks, and what were the true reasons, why the doctor was helping his patients to end their lives. Without spoiling the bio-pic film, too much, I think, the movie, somewhat achieve that, without sugar coated, too much on avoiding the macabre stuff. While, there was some humorous moments. For the most part, the events in the film, mirror very closely to what happen in real-life. There wasn't that many, historic inaccuracies. Still, there were a few events that had to be left out like Kevorkian's previous work history, like experimenting on transfusing cadaver blood to needy human, his advocacy of optional organ donation by condemned criminals and researching on retinas at the moment of death. Then, there is the fact that a few multiply characters had to be consolidated into one, in order to get the movie pacing going; for example, Michael Schwartz, the defense lawyer that help Jack win, most of his cases. Despite that, the film was still, truly a tour de force. Al Pacino's performance was impressive. While, you can still hear Pacino's husky voice, he was still mostly very unrecognizable. He really did, seem like another person, instead of a character that happens to sound and act like Pacino. I haven't saw, acting like this, from him, in a long time. It's nice to see, Al Pacino retake a character actor role. I also like how the movie offers an objective view of Kevorkian's years as a practitioner and advocate for assisted suicide and free speech, rather than shaming him, as a monster like some 1990s media sources did. More so, the film reveals the doctor was just, like any other man. A man who love music, poetry, and painting. Because of this, the movie is clearly on open on Dr. Kevorkian's humanity side. Due to the film's perspective, opponents that are against him, are not really given much of a voice in the film. They're portray, as a bit ignorant and cartoony righteous activist driven type villains, which was a little unfair. They do have good reasons, why physician-assisted suicides shouldn't be, done, but none of the great examples like malpractice of Dr. Harold Shipman or the idea of consent under pressure are, used in the film. Opponents of this will probably, not like this movie, because of that lack of information. While, personally, I have mixed feelings about the issue of voluntary euthanasia. I do believe, that the choice to live or die is a fundamental right for the individual, and not the state. However, I don't think, the film was perfect, even with the awesome music by composer, Marcelo Zarvos. While, I like how Barry Levinson and his crew uses actual interview videos of Kevorkian's patients telling their stories, cleverly using computer image technology to insert Pacino into the scene where the real Kevorkian had been. I just think, the integration of real-footage with fictional footage, could be, done, a little better. At certain moments during the interview, Pacino's head seem, a bit off-titled. The film also doesn't have the best cinematography. I can barely see some characters, in certain frames. Another problem, I got, against the movie is the awkward fade outs. There were points in the film that I felt, were a little too slow & traditional. The first part of the film is a good example, as it doesn't match up with the quicker, and faster paced second half, with all the jump cuts. Don't get me wrong, I know, the first half is, supposed to establish the location and the characters, so, it needed time. However, it doesn't do, a good job, establishing anything. Characters come into the frame, awkwardly, introduce, without much acknowledgment. A good example of this, are the patients. We're never really, get to know, how, they end up, finding the doctor, nor the dilemmas, they must face, in making the decision to die with their friends and family. All, the audience hear about, is bits about their illness. They come and go, without much, emotional weight. Nevertheless, at least, the characters that support, Dr. Kevorkian with his work are established a little better, even if some of them, don't really do much, like Janet Good (Susan Sarandon). Even, after rewatching the film, for a second time, I still really have no clue, what, her character was all about. Despite that, I thought, the acting from the supporting cast was equally as good as the main actor, with John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, and Brenda Vaccaro adding their brilliants to their roles. Great chemistry, between all of their characters and the doctor. However, the best one for me, was Kevorkian's relationship with his headstrong attorney, Geoffrey Fieger (Danny Huston). Huston played it, spot-on. Who knew, that Huston had a convincing comedy side to his acting. It's freshening, not to see him, in a villain role. Overall: While, the movie is still somewhat dark and macabre. In the end, the film still work. It does serves as a tool and a morally questionable of what is your rights as living human being. Because of that, without a doubt, it's worth checking out.

It's no surprise that Jack was a controversial figure, he had a different mindset from the majority of society in a time still shrouded in old superstition. You could call him a lot of things, (I know the media sure did) but I choose to call him an activist. I don't want to use the word "martyr" because to me that implies that he put himself on a pedestal. It's interesting how in the next 40 years or so, what Jack set into motion could be realized, if not at least advanced somewhat. I guess you could say this is one-sided, but to me, the only side is Jack's. I'm not saying that opposition to euthanasia is dumb or stupid or anything like that, but put yourself in these patient's shoes. Would you want to have constant pain as the result of an illness until you died? I wouldn't. Would you want to slowly forget everything you've ever known and loved, and then die? I wouldn't. I know that the opposition has it's roots based in religion and "playing God", but beings I don't believe in God, that argument isn't valid to me. The politics aside though, this movie is very well acted, very well shot, and a very good story, give it a try, it might even open your eyes or introduce you to a new viewpoint.

This is one of those rare hi-impact, makes-you-squirm-while-watching films that cannot be reviewed on its own without commenting on the underlying social issues. So here we go: THE MOVIE Directed by Barry Levinson (one of the top directors of the last century) and starring one of the top actors of the last century giving one of the best performances of his career (understated and self-aware, NOT the over-the-top Pacino we have come to expect) ... was there ever any doubt? The only oddity that this reviewer found is that Pacino's agency still uses 40-year-old photos of him in their PR kits, so a novice (think, alien film reviewer from another planet) looking at this film for the first time might spend the length of the film trying to find the lead actor identified in the kit ... and never locate him.Brilliant, touching, revealing, and horrifying. In other words, a perfect reflection of what passes for intelligent civilization in our world.THE SOCIAL GESTALT For the first time, the script makes it clear that the lawyers acting for the state TOOK IT AS A PERSONAL AFFRONT that Dr. K was so forthright about what he had done ... and why ... and MADE IT THEIR PERSONAL MISSION to bring him down ... and USED A TECHNICALITY IN THE LAW (adjusting the indictment to a one narrow charge, a charge which could not be defended by a full look at the surrounding facts, as one might otherwise expect in a capital case).Which pretty much summarizes how our Justice system works. Forget the theories they teach in law school, forget the statue of the lady with the blindfold over her eyes, when they REALLY WANT TO GET YOU, they are going to get you.