Too much of everything

That was an excellent one.

Good concept, poorly executed.

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Hill plays a journalist interviewing a murderer during his trial played by Franco. Vague exchanges take place while the two main characters apparently become friends. At some point the movie ends, without a point and without any real story or a hint of subplot.Apart from it not having a story to tell, The films sports a most terrible script uttered by totally uninteresting characters in scenes that are systemically too long. None of the characters are believable, ruining the film's main plot point. Especially Hill's character makes zero sense. You can't be an investigative reporter and then be that naive. A friendship emerging from such shallow, boring and fake conversations, is also not credible. And what was the character of the wife even doing in this movie? She seemed to be his sister at first. Recommended viewing speed: 4X

Like the name implies this is the true story of journalist Mike Finkel's relationship with convicted killer Christian Longo. Brought together by their tendencies to lie, or inflate their egos, the journalist and the convict become friends and eerily enough, learn from each other. Based on the book of the same name, this story is brought to the screen and then aptly butchered by a floundering plot, aimless direction, and slow paced action.Both Hill and Franco have Oscar nominations to their names, and though they are predominately known for their comedic roles, it makes sense to put them in a film where they explore serious topics. Still, if you're going to put two people with their backgrounds in a dramatic film, it better be a good film. Often it feels like Franco is putting us on, trying to play a child killer while hiding an insidious smirk behind the blank expression he wears for much of the film. Hill does his best, but the role isn't as meaty as past supporting performances in "The Wolf of Wall Street" or even "Moneyball." He's more subdued and anal, and it's not a look that Hill can pull off. Though each is trying to embody their characters, it doesn't feel authentic at the end of the day.The link between Finkel and Longo is well established. There are many similar things about the two, including how they journal, they want to be taken seriously as writers, and they often twist of the truth to suit their narrative. At the end of the film it's still unclear whether Finkel, seeing these imperfect similarities, is horrified or unmoved. The ending shows Longo as the calculated, willful killer who has tricked Finkel, while also charming others into believing in his plight. Was Finkel seriously shocked about learning his prison pen pal was deranged, or was he more interested in seeing how they diverged in the wood? Either way it's a muddled, uncertain film that doesn't know what it wants to say or how to say it.

This film has been maligned by some for being too slow moving and having an unsatisfying ending. This is a common rant by some. This is a very well presented portrayal of a relationship between two men who are more alike than different. Michael Finkel is a disgraced reporter. He gets fired from the New York Times for shortcutting a story. His reputation is pretty much shot until he gets a call from a man, Christian Longo, who has been accused of murdering his wife had his three children. A bond develops between them and Finkel, but is this man a truth teller or pathological liar and murderer. This is what Finkel must sort out. In the process, an obsession occurs, where he investigates to the exclusion of everything else. The acting is superb and the story easily holds one's interest to the bitter end. I believe that getting there is twice the fun and if the conclusion didn't satisfy people, I feel they missed out on something pretty unique.

There's No Denying the Truth, that this is an Unnerving Story. A Real-Life Wife and Child Murder Case where Christian Longo is Arrested and put on Trial for the Grisly and Sensational Crimes.The Film Maintains an Eerie Atmosphere of Ambiguity and Anguish in the form of a Disgraced Journalist (Jonah Hill) named Mike Finkle and the Accused Longo (James Franco). Longo uses the Name of the Reporter as a Fake Identity and Therein lies the Plot. Finkle Sensing a Rebound in the form of a "True Story" Story, Decides to Meet with the Prisoner in Prison.The Over-Familiarity of James Franco on Screen is once again a Hindrance to Accepting Him as Anyone but James Franco. So Playing a Complex Character who may be a Psycho-Socio Cold Blooded Killer who may or may not be Telling the Truth, is a Challenge for the Audience to Separate the Goofy Franco and buy Him as Christian Longo.Clarity is Never a Thing in This Thing and while a Certain Amount of Mystery is Required it Ends Up being a Muddle at Times. There are Moments of Uncertainty that Intrigue but the Movie Never Lets Up on the Unknown ever Being Truly Known until the Ending Scroll.The Film is Better in Parts than the Whole and it is Worth a Watch but Ultimately, Most Likely, will be a Frustrating Experience. It's too Short and Shallow to be much more than a Quick Fix Guilty Pleasure for True Crime Junkies and Fans of Lurid B-Movies.