I watch a lot of interview documentaries, and unfortunately, this one disappoints, mainly because of how little information the viewer is given throughout.
At all turns in the story, major gaps in context seem to be purposeful on the part of the filmmaker, but they don't advance any dramatic purpose. You only learn, for example, that the perpetrator (in addition to binge drinking) was also struggling with drug addiction about halfway through the runtime. There is no elaboration on what kinds of drugs, post arrest toxicology, or any other hard contextual facts. Perhaps in trying for a reasonable runtime, the editor butchered many of the structural details of the case that were no doubt somewhere in the source interviews.
In terms of justice served, it may be that the prosecutors over charged and the jury opted to role play as forensic academics in conceding a verdict. The question only obliquely raised by the film is an important one: what interest does severe punishment serve if culpability is as foggy as motive for a horrific act? No sentence will bring back the victim.
The subject matter itself is frustrating of course, since intent for this kind of killing is ultimately unknowable. But this film's garish stylistic choices, like ridiculous video effects and sound design, frustrate further.
At all turns in the story, major gaps in context seem to be purposeful on the part of the filmmaker, but they don't advance any dramatic purpose. You only learn, for example, that the perpetrator (in addition to binge drinking) was also struggling with drug addiction about halfway through the runtime. There is no elaboration on what kinds of drugs, post arrest toxicology, or any other hard contextual facts. Perhaps in trying for a reasonable runtime, the editor butchered many of the structural details of the case that were no doubt somewhere in the source interviews.
In terms of justice served, it may be that the prosecutors over charged and the jury opted to role play as forensic academics in conceding a verdict. The question only obliquely raised by the film is an important one: what interest does severe punishment serve if culpability is as foggy as motive for a horrific act? No sentence will bring back the victim.
The subject matter itself is frustrating of course, since intent for this kind of killing is ultimately unknowable. But this film's garish stylistic choices, like ridiculous video effects and sound design, frustrate further.