I recently watched the limited series Inventing Anna. I loved it, disliked it and was confused by it. 🙂
It’s a dramatized version of the true story of an intriguing con-woman who took New York elites by storm.
Loving it – there’s a lot to love about this series. Performances by actor Julia Garner as con-woman Anna Delvy and actor Anna Chlumsky as reporter Vivian Kent are top notch. We enter Anna’s world and crimes through the eyes of the reporter and, each episode, we are given flashbacks from the points of view of those whom she interviews. The cast of other seasoned NY reporters assisting Vivian are tremendous, expressing worldly cynicism and an appropriate level of Trump derangement syndrome that took place by NY reporters during his presidency.
Anna Delve’s ability to convince, sway, use and manipulate some of the most powerful financiers was fascinating to watch, each seeing something in her that inspired them, whether that be her vision, her youthful persistence, her big picture optimism, or a potential big payday.
Confused by it – Rule #1 of filmmaking… okay, probably not Rule #1, but it’s in the top five, which is never give your audience an excuse to disengage from your story. For low budget films, it’s often the acting, lighting or audio to pulls the audience out of the story. For me, in this series, it was the casting of one role.
To be clear, as one has to be in today’s pathetically fragile world, my concern is not about this actor’s sexual choices. It was because the actor was obviously born a dude and was playing a woman and, since I’d never seen this actor before (and if I had, I probably wouldn’t have been so distracted by it) I wasn’t sure if the actor was trans or the character they were playing was trans.
Big deal. Maybe not. Maybe yes, depending on what happened. So when the trans actor’s character was dating a man, I was now confused as to whether the male love interest was aware if the character was trans (if they indeed were), or if the man was gay or straight.
However, when I finally settled on the idea that the character was indeed a woman, I was again taken out of the story when the trans actor was obviously tucking their package between their legs while in a woman’s bathing suit.
Or was the character they were playing doing that?
Then I realized, why the hell am I thinking about this crap? I should be paying attention to the story, but these persistent, unnecessary questions kept breaking Rule #1. Or 2, 3, 4 or 5, which ever one it is. May not bother others, but it irritated me.
Disliking it – First, the series was too long. Seeing Anna exploit people the same way, but from different points of view, isn’t interesting. After a while, you’re like, yeah, I know how this episode is going to end, with Anna getting off scot free while the character deals with the collateral damage. You never want your audience to know what’s going to happen.
Second, somehow, over the course of the story, the main character, reporter Vivian, and her co-hort of bitter reporters, end up rooting for sociopathic Anna, hoping she escaped her legal challenges.
Say what?
I’ve known a sociopath. I’ve seen the damage they inflicted upon those that crossed their path. No matter how noble Anna’s goals may have appeared on the outside, she was a pathological liar, manipulator and sociopath who took advantage of everyone with whom she came into contact.
So, the reporter’s evolution and, by default, ours, from curiosity and displeasure of Anna’s personality to somehow hoping she doesn’t pay for her crimes was jarring and unsatisfying and also crossed Rule # 1 or 5 or whatever.
Final take – great performances get mired by an uneven story that is too long and ends up in a moral position opposite of what the audience wants and expects.