Completely totally disappointing. Whittaker is great, that's about it

Rating: 2/10 (11 January 2008)

I am trying to figure out why this film received such rave reviews. To make up a story around a doctor who never existed, bring him together in relationships with real life characters as a way to describe Idi Amin and the history of Uganda makes no sense and in fact is a huge draw back to the intensity of any film. There is so much more that could have been done with this story as a film, it is really embarrassing to watch it. The story line itself doesn't hold together. There is no reason behind much of the action except to try to show how crazy Idi is, but why do that with a fictional character when a film like this is asking you to look at the horrible truths of Idi Amin? I did not understand the film, there is little character development. There is a lot of horrific moments of violence but it does not fit together. What a pity! The screenplay is not good; the cinematography in parts is boring and feels like the camera was slipping (ie the editing is worse than the cinematography) and the acting was poor and senseless. Whittaker was wonderful as Idi Amin but even his character development did not make it for me. And can anyone tell me if it's true about Amin's wife and a foreign doctor - white foreign doctor? Is any of that true? Beats me - I can't trust anything about this film.