In the Name of the Father (1993) (mini-review++)

inthename.jpg

(If you’re curious, my review process. It’s also pasted at the end of this post. I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me.)

(***all-purpose SPOILER ALERT*** there may be some in this review)

The mini-review:

In the Name of the Father

acting 10

directing 8

effects 7

editing 8

writing 8

SW SCORE: 41

4.1 out of 5 🐙

++

I don’t need to tell you that Daniel Day-Lewis is a genius. He’s probably the best actor of a generation. Or he’s at least in the conversation. In yet another film based on a true story, he plays an innocent man whose not only thrown into jail for a crime he did not commit but his father is thrown in with him. The sad commentary on criminal justice is that you could probably populate an entire genre with movies about innocent people jailed by corrupt, evil forces. Even though Day-Lewis is the engine that powers this film, don’t sleep on Giuseppe Conlon. The man has a face for all time and his acting chops are just as singular. What is it about justice miraculously appearing in a court that gives me such a rush? I don’t know. I guess I just like unicorns.

.

.

.

Review process: (this is always evolving, I’m sad to say. I’m more of a watcher who makes mostly unhelpful observations about things I have absorbed. I am not unlike a pop culture blob.)

Two scores are assigned: (I don’t believe in Rotten Tomatoes. I just believe in me)

(1) Shark Wrighter (SW) Score: Based on a sum of 5 sub-scores (acting, directing, writing/story, effects: cinematography &/or animation &/or effects, editing) with 1 being terrible and 10 being terrific.

(2) Octopuses (0-5 🐙, with 5 being fantastic and 0 being feces)

(3) Octopuses are my unquantifiable feeling…not that SW score is scientific…but this one is even less so

(4) ++ This optional section includes any incredibly *brilliant observations that don’t fit into simple quantitative slices like the scores and octopuses *(they are likely NOT brilliant)

Leave a Reply