ironhorse_iv
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.
