I finally watched the Mindhunter, I did not like it and its individual elements give me strong resistance, but I have a lot of thoughts about this production which I'm willing to share with you.
I've already mentioned that I'm not a fan of this series. It is not even that bad, it just seems to me completely mediocre. Although it has a decent, dark atmosphere, I associate it with Fincher's Zodiac, which I definitely do not like. And so I think that Mindhunter will appeal especially to those who like that movie for the unhurried pace and the pampered form. Although "like" may be the wrong word in the context of this story.
Information that David Fincher is responsible for this production warmed up the public. The plot of the series is based on facts - the source material was the book by John Douglas of the same title. If you are interested in the original, look into my text - you will learn from it what to expect from this boom and what is better not to set yourself.
Not for the first time in my life knowledge of the book's interfered with the reception of the film. I definitely value reportage and documents more than the story, I was bothering the add-ons from the source material. The creators decided to treat the book as an inspiration and, against the background of the events described in it, created completely new heroes who only loosely refer to their real counterparts. And so John Douglas became Holden Ford, a horribly annoying and spectacularly defiant boy whom I can not look at without increasing irritation.
I do not know if it's a matter of Jonathan Groff's acting or the fact that his character is so different from John Douglas. However, I was not completely interested in the romantic thread and I was not convinced by the Debbie’s character, who Holden meets. Although I understand why the creators of the show decided to deviate so much from the facts - ultimately Douglas himself is not exactly a guy to whom was sympathetic, and his attitude and statements often arouse reluctance - I just admit that for me the fiction could not match reality. The price for the autotalisation of the whole story turned out to be what was the most interesting: facts and curiosities.
However, the situation is saved by actors incarnating in the form of prisoners in high-security prisons, serial murderers whom the main character talks to. The viewer, to whom these names are not foreign, the book provides a lot of interesting information, and the series revives the people that a great part of American society would like to forget. Those who watched Mad Men may remember that this production abounds in details that accurately embed the story in a specific historical time: in one episode, the heroes follow reports on Richard Speck, a criminal who in 1966 raped and murdered 8 nursing students in Chicago. In the later seasons, there is also the story of the daughter of Roger Sterling, who leaves her husband and child to join the sect, according to some of them being a representation of the Charles Manson Family. Although this theory has not been confirmed, in the final of the series Donald Draper finds out that because of the Family and the horror of the Americans after her brutal murders, he will not be able to catch hitch-hiking because no one will want to give him a lift.
In Mindhunter the viewer is confronted not only with Speck, but also with Ed Kemper and Jerry Brudos. These are the best and strongest moments in the series, and it is regrettable that there are not even more of them, that to these conversations the story unfolding unnecessarily has been added to develop themes related to the personal life of the main characters. These seem to be completely unnecessary here, with the history of Wendy Carr at the forefront. Modeled on the authentic character of Dr. Ann Wolbert Burgess, this heroine got free homosexual orientation from the creators of the series and it is hard to resist the impression that someone had the burning need to make the plot more interesting and to fine-tune the facts. Was not really the fact of being a woman enough for the creators to fully reflect the scale of the problems faced by the FBI employees in the 1970s? The first women agents appeared in the ranks of the Bureau only in 1972 (today they only account for about 20% of all agents) and there is no need for a great philosophy to associate this date with the death of Edgar Hoover, not known for progressiveness in terms of equality. Perhaps this is the reason why the creators decided to settle the action of series in the late 70s, when cooperation with the woman was only controversial, and not completely unthinkable, while the psychology itself from the taboo became slowly "only" a shameful hobby unworthy of a man. Carr's character is the quintessence of what Hoover and his followers stubbornly fought throughout their lives: not only a woman, but a psychologist and a lesbian. Forgive malice, but in the context of the activities and views of the legendary FBI boss, the icing on the cake would be if this figure were still black. Or if she was a communist. Although I whole-heartedly represent all social groups in the works of culture, I apologize very much, but I do not buy it completely. Do we really have to pretend that women did not have enough hard times in those days simply because they were women? And is the homosexual orientation of an extremely attractive (and how) Carr on the show any purpose other than the production of a bizarre (because one-sided) subtext in its relationship with Ford? And, of course, politeness participation? Totally great, it's a pity that homosexuality is a decorative Christmas tree bauble here. A bit on the principle "we do not have to discriminate against minorities".
Once again, I have the impression that it is impossible to create a role of a context-free office romance for an attractive actress. Maybe Hoover was right, not allowing his agents to contact the opposite sex during business hours, because Mindhunter clearly shows that poor men simply can not control themselves and end up losing their concentration because of their lust. How boring would the show be if Wendy Carr was 50 and was - evoking the classic - beauty rather unobtrusive. Would the viewer be able to watch the episodes at all, if any of the important (and at the same time intelligent, but what does it matter) heroines was not a long-legged slim-body racket?
This exaggeration of the protagonist and completely unnecessary erotic tension make series very Hollywood features, turning the whole artillery against the viewer, who is apparently too stupid to understand the nuances. Problems with women's equality are not enough, let's add intolerance due to the orientation in the mentally concreted FBI (Carr so long hides her homosexuality, aware of the times in which she lives and the specificity of the environment) and in opposition to the fortress of patriarchy and masculinism, let us put the essence completely independent from men. Otherwise, the viewer will not catch the essence of the problem. But let us not forget that it would be a weak story if the heroes did not desire each other and if nobody wanted to get into bed. What an idiotic idea in general, so that the plot of the series about serial killers would not complicate the erotic fantasies of heroes and their unfulfilled hopes for sex. Perhaps in the second season it will suddenly turn out that Wendy Carr is bisexual, and between her and Holden Ford something will happen? You know, a furtive kiss in a moment of oblivion after dramatic and probably stressful events, sudden doubts of the heroine about her own orientation, maybe even a crazy experiment? So many possibilities! Because nothing warms up like a study of serial killers, you know. This series would be much more interesting if the main character or possibly his partner was homosexual. It would not add anything to the story of the birth of criminal profiling, but hey, that's not what this is about.
Disappointed the first season of the series will be those who waited for the appearance of Charles Manson. John Douglas actually met with the founder of the Family and interviewed him, the creators decided, to save this thread on (as I assume) the second season. Cleverly, the audience is guaranteed. Will Ted Bundy also appear there, with whom Douglas has never personally spoken? Time will tell. So far, information about Manson's death will certainly contribute to the popularity of this production. In any other case, it could be said that this is a bit of an ugly mechanism and in total it smells a bit of feeding on deaths, but ultimately we are not talking about a man for whom anyone will cry. It is not right to say bad things about the dead, but without exaggeration.
Mindhunter will remain for me a project not entirely successful, which after receiving the climate and the silhouette of serial killers have completely nothing to offer, especially in terms of feature. I sincerely regret that the book did not serve as an impulse to create a documentary series that could provide not only entertainment and curiosities about dangerous psychopaths, but also first-hand information about the realities of work at the FBI in the times described in the book and how it changed approach to criminal profiling. Perhaps I've been watching too many TV shows lately, and I’m too overwhelmed, but this was only a nice story, with murderers in the background.
This is not the first time, when I completely do not understand the fascination of the viewers with some production, so I accept that it may simply be a matter of taste, and I am searching for the power of failings. Perhaps. The fact remains, if the actors who played in the Mindhunter serial killers really impressed me, the personalities of the main heroes and their turmoil were boring to me.
I will not watch the second season again.
#review #tv #series #netflix #blog