'True Story' yet feels false

Rating: Null/10 (16 August 2017)

I don't criticize the movie on PC or 'racial' grounds, but, on how it works - doesn't - on screen. Unfortunately, the backlast TO the backlash paints just about anybody who doesn't like DETROIT as being PC. I strongly support Bigelow and Boal's 'right' to make any movie they want, but, it's also a person's right to disapprove and not have one's motives questioned. My full take:
Director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal's THE HURT LOCKER and ZERO DARK THIRTY are two of best movies of the millennium. Because of that, it is doubly difficult to write that their current effort, DETROIT is such a disappointment.
The movie takes place during the Detroit riots of July 1967. It begins with a wider overview of the situation, complete with archival news reports, photos and audio.* Interspersed are a few on the ground perspectives of various characters. It's not terribly involving, but not bad. Some of these characters begin to gather in and around a motel. At that point, it becomes clear that the events at that motel will become the centerpiece of the movie.
Those events became known as the infamous and horrific Algiers Motel Incident, complete with a contemporaneous best-selling book of that name by John Hersey. It is here where the movie failings emerge. If there is one thing that the various witnesses can agree on - is that there are few things they can agree on. In addition to the book, there were several investigations, court cases and a myriad of stories written and recorded over the four decades since. Bigelow and Boal said they did not use the book when making DETROIT.
However, the movie-makers made the decision to depict a single narrative viewpoint as if it were "the truth". While the incident may not have exactly been a Rashomon situation, it was certainly a chaotic one where no one person was witness to each and every event that happened along the way. That is Bigelow and Boal's artistic decision. But, it becomes disastrous if not downright distateful on screen. For, despite fine performances and strong production values, the sequence never quite rings true. It seems Written. Directed. Coerced. Co-Opted. Manufactured. It's a 'true story' that feels false. Without truth. Without insight. The brutality and inhumanity is so unremitting that it takes on the feel of an exploitation movie. I fully understand that exploitation was the last thing on Bigelow and Boal's mind, but the screen does not lie. Yes, these incidents did happen, but did we need to see all the blood,bruising and nudity? It further complicates things that DETROIT's narrative of the events is contradicted by much of the sworn testimony of the witnesses - both at the time and subsequently**. Again, Bigelow and Boal's artistic perogative, but to what end if not to further belief in the portrayal of events??
DETROIT's last act is a long protracted court-room drama. It's supposed to bring context and some closure to the events, but, like the bulk of the movie it feels wholly unsatisfactory and unfullfilling. Whenever a 'true story' about barbarous events is brought to the screen by such a clearly talented cast and crew the term "powerful" is often used (indeed, there were several audible gasps in the screening I attended). But, a production can be both "powerful" and "empty". DETROIT, unfortunately, ends up on the lower end of that scale.
* Kudos to Bigelow for preserving the proper aspect ratio for the vintage footage
** Without getting into spoilers, I will just mention a relatively minor example. The musical band portrayed in the movie, The Dramatics, are depicted as newbies who are seeking a first break. In actuality, they had been together for four years and even been a recording act for at least two years Prior to the events in DETROIT. I don't criticize Boal & Bigelow's movie because of a few fudged facts, but, because it undercuts the drama even further, making it feel false.