Hoax: The Kidnapping of Sherri Papini

I had followed the case of Sherri Papini through a true crime podcaster that I watch. The case fascinated me, that a woman would go to such lengths as what Papini did with her fake kidnapping, that I thought I must check out the movie.

Right from the start I was aware that the acting was very flat as was the story telling. I am usually a fan of Jaime King, I love her as Rose in the series Black Summer, however I really struggled to watch her portray Sherri Papini. I struggled with all the cast.

For a movie based on a true crime I was very disappointed. I hope someone else has a crack at turning this story into a film.

What or whose perspective is this story? The public? The husband? The direction of the story appears to shift blame to an inattentive husband. He over reacts, underreacts, seems wooden- offish. She a woman described as 'perfect' 'vivacious', 'energetic' 'put together', is portrayed as someone who would be described as dull, disheveled, is conveyed so differently-"depressed, Bored, abused, on the verge of a breakdown?" There is little to no depiction of the torture her husband endured, nor is there empathy.

Don't waste your time.

It's not the acting as eluded to in a previous review. It's the story arc. There's no point of view, no empathy, & the personalities too off.

I've been looking forward to seeing this since it was first announced that it was a hoax. I smelled it when it first happened, I knew that the story Sherry Papini told was completely implausible. I don't ever expect Oscar level performances from TV movies, but Jamie King's performance was so awful, it was distracting. Josh Collins as Keith Papini was okay, but he overacted the "borderline abusive husband" role to such a degree that it ruined any sense of sympathy for him, when in reality, I felt that the real Keith was the true victim in this whole story. I thought the actress who played the investigator did a decent job, but otherwise, the only excuse I think of for how badly the movie was as a whole, was that it must have been directed by a seventh grader. Such a disappointment.

I'm "okay" with a bad made for tv movie. Because like, now we have a reference of a big deal simplified and dramatized in a compact 1.5 hours. It's bad, dont get me wrong... but you don't watch lifetime movies for the Oscar creds.

My issue comes down to production's irresponsible ignorance of the facts. Theres been a minimum of 5 docs about this case. We ALL KNOW she cut her hair. All her interviews were with her hair cut. ALSO the person that found her was a man, you can hear it in the 911 call. Im okay with dramatizing and taking certain liberties, but c'mon.. how does your art/HMU department overlook that? I'm just not a fan of entire projects greenlighted to have such important things overlooked. Lifetime, we know you arent quality entertainment, but why skimp on simple things?

I came here to talk about what a tragedy this feeble LMN attempt at storytelling was, between the terrible acting and the universal blandness, but what you need to do is go look at the VERY comprehensive review from back on 2/19/23 by goodpatron23. They nailed EVERYTHING I had to say and then some - - and with almost-perfect grammar, etc., so I have nothing to add except like I said above -- don't bother. (It has been my experience that ever since Lifetime went Canadian, it has gone tremendously downhill in terms of quality with regard to Lifetime movies. I just don't think the CBC filmmaking standards are the same.)