tomgillespie2002 Based on the memoir of the same name by shamed ex-journalist Michael Finkel, Rupert Goold's True Story is a story of amazing coincidence and unexpected friendship, as two unrelated men from completely different backgrounds find their destinies intertwined. At its heart, this is a true-crime drama that flew under many people's radars, which is surprising given how audience interest in shocking tales of murder and the subsequent trials have been piqued by Netflix's many terrific documentaries. Yet the crime itself, which occurs before the film begins, isn't the main focus of True Story. Instead, we get a character piece centred on a busted writer who believes he has been given a second chance, and a man awaiting trial for the murder of his wife and three children.The film begins with Finkel (played by Jonah Hill) in Africa, interviewing various victims of modern-day slavery. He is seen as a future Pulitzer recipient by his bosses at the New York Times, and has seen many of his previous pieces grace the front page. He is soon brought back down to Earth when his editors confront him about creating a composite character for his latest story, and is soon fired. Other papers want nothing to do with him, so when he learns that a man wanted for murder named Christian Longo (James Franco) has been using his name before finally being arrested, he sees it as his opportunity to drag his name out of the mud. A fan of Finkel's work, Longo grants him exclusive rights to the story, and in return Finkel will teach him out to write, and promise not to publish anything until after the trial. The two become friends, with Finkel going so far as believing they are some kind of kindred spirits.A lot of time is spent with the two characters simply talking in a room, and it's a nice surprise that theatre director Goold manages to avoid a stagey feel. But what goes down within the prison's visiting room fails to convince as one would expect from such seasoned actors. Franco puts his half-closed eyes and charming smile to good use, but you rarely get the sense that Hill is a writer capable of reaching the dizzy heights of wunderkind status at the New York Times, and he always feels two or three steps behind. As Finkel's wife, Felicity Jones is given little to do at first but gaze at her husband with concern as he pours over documents and Longo's extensive letters, before she locks horns with the slippery inmate himself. Yet these later dramatic scenes seem inserted to add unnecessary emotional drive, or to give the talented actress something to do. Nevertheless, this is an engaging retelling of a fascinating true story which sizzles with tension until the very end. Unless you already know the outcome of course.

Reno Rangan It was based on the book of the same name, which was originally inspired by the real events. But there's a striking resemblance between this and the Truman Capote story. About a man who is serving in prison for slaying a family and his encounter with a reporter/writer. And so their relationship strengthens as they sit together to discuss about each others life event. That is the main film, which covers the majority of the film, but feels like they revealed nothing much, particularly for our convince, yet the story moved forward.For the Truman Capote, there are two films, including the one I liked 'Infamous' and the other one is 'Capote'. Besides these two, there's another title called 'In Cold Blood' that reveals the other side of the event, before Truman enters the scene. So that's what I'm interested after watching this film. Because right now they preferred to portray a struggling writer and the crime parts were not given any importance. That means it is basically about a reporter/writer doing a story/book.If they decide to make that one with the same cast as a prequel, then James Franco gets into an action which probably would give a good reason behind such crime where in this film the viewers can't end watching surely what really happened. Both, Jonah Hill and James Franco was really impressive in this. Felicity Jones had the small presence, but was in a main role. It was a feature film debut for the director and he was well managed to make it decently. Overall, for me, it was a good film, not the best, but can be watched once.6/10

George_Upjohn Michael Finkel's writing, is its own force. The adventures and people leaching through the glossy pages, a complicated writing process used to make it seem like each sentence was written in a few seconds. Consequentially, many critics become confused between the novel by Finkel, the events as the media retells it, and this film. When looking at the screen alone, and blocking out knowledge of the real events, a raw journey into the definition of "truth" appears through the dazzle of famous faces.A gamble no-doubt, casting two heavyweight comedy actors into such a narrow-scoped thriller. But one that has paid off, with the on-screen characteristics of Jonah Hill and James Franco balancing against each other - portrayed as two sides of the same lying coin. A murderer and his journalist, both fallen from grace, both deceptive and both battling for redemption.What a fitting backdrop to such an unsettling theme - brisk, baron, beaches around the state of New York. Gorgeous camera-work, with sunsets bouncing off the eerie-still water, and dripping through the lens, a feature which struck a chord at Sundance, but could not penetrate the multiplexes. Ignore the panning of the critical steamroller, take a step and choose your side.

hughman55 I don't enjoy taking time out to write a review of a film that I find thoroughly without merit. But here goes. This film is about a horrific crime. A husband and father murders his wife and three children, gets caught, and attempts to place the blame on his murdered wife. He flees to Mexico where he tries to pass himself off as NY Times reporter/writer, and easily impressed sycophant, Mike Finkle. This film deals with their relationship. As one character (a relative of the murdered wife) puts it to Mr. Finkle during a trial recess, "you could have written a story about anyone and you chose him". She's right. And so this film, like the book it's based on, and the real life relationship between the cold blooded killer and the "hero" worshiping writer, falls into the narcissistic formula of being about the observers rather than the crime or it's victims. It is sickening. The screen writers inject redemptive moments into the story line which does nothing to change the fact that this film has the wrong perspective and is about all the wrong people. And instead of having a ring of truth in them they simply come off as a unnecessary confection, and an utterly distasteful device, in order to sell this bad film. I didn't buy it for a second. I really hate movies like this. It, like the book it's based on, is a vulture picking over the bones of four innocent murder victims for profit.