Hoax: The Kidnapping of Sherri Papini

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.

After watching actual footage pertaining to this case this movie was a complete let down. If anything, it makes Sherri seem weak and basic versus addressing her real mental health. Sherri seemed like a complaining kept woman who "stayed for the kids". There are options this is no longer the 60's. They also made Keith seem like a "bad" husband when relationships are complicated. I wish they portrayed Sherri for her true manipulative and narcissistic self. I couldn't even make it to the end!! Definitely not worth it! I expected more from this movie and they didn't even cut her hair like Sherri actually did!!

Whoever directed this movie missed a lot of key points, from what really happened. When Keith found her phone, he said he took a picture before picking it up. In this movie he said I didn't touch anything and left it on the ground. When Sherri was kidnapped and returned home, her hair was cut short, she shackled herself up with zip ties, chains and locks in the back of the truck, prior to being dropped off. Also she had bangs. Also the acting was horrific, I'm not an actor, but I thought the acting was done poorly. So badly written! I'm completely disappointed. I give it 0 stars, I wasted time that I can't get back.

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 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.)