"Seven" or "Four point five?"

Rating: Null/10 (13 December 2004)

There is no doubt "Seven" is a superior film in every way, so far as crime dramas/psychological dramas go, Fincher is indeed a visionary director. This film however has achieved an unrealistic and totally unsupportable "aura" of brilliance that is simply unjustified. Having seen it now five times, the latest last night after my son bought it for my birthday, I have to declare it to be as boring and pretentious as the first night I saw it.
Without anything but praise for everyone's performance (Spacey, especially) I still have nothing but blank indifference to every character presented here. What in Zeus' butthole was the point of the film? Any half competent lawyer would have gotten Pitt a suspended sentence (justifiable homicide...temporary insanity..whatever) Who cares what the hell Freeman decided to do...hang around a few more years, go shoot a few chickens? As for Ms Paltrow - the most boring and one-dimensional actress yet paraded on the silver screen (though Nicole Kidman isn't far behind)...HER fate was the highlight of the movie.
Shamelessly exploitive crap though it was, I found RESURRECTION (A "Seven" clone) way more interesting and given that starred Mr "Wooden" himself (Christopher Lambert)....maybe I need therapy.
Quite frankly for all its social comment, upmarket direction, cinematography and set-design, I think "Seven" is a modern "Kings New Clothes." Great film....shame about the entertainment factor. ANY film that feels like you've just donated four hours of your life has at its core, a problem.
As for those who even MENTION this in the same breath as SILENCE OF THE LAMBS - you HAVE to be kidding! That sequence between Hannibal and Starling during their first meeting alone, blows everything this film has to offer out the window.