Why are we So Fascinated by the genre of real crime? Morbid iOsubopity seems to be, to some extent, responsible for its increased popularity, raising unpleasant issues about the ethics of perceiving such a subject as fun. On the other hand, there is a psychological complexity of all this, which also points out how vulnerable we are. The fact that anyone can be exposed to such extreme criminality is a sobering realization as well as something used by streamers such as Netflix to fuel all kinds of sensationalized projects.

Ad

Turning trauma into real life into semi-fiction stories will always be a slippery slope, but I suppose there is a certain value to bring awareness of toxic attitudes responsible for certain crimes. A good example of this measured approach is Netflix's "adolescence" that uses real -life crime statistics to investigate misogyny Between a particular demographic within the fictional setting.

The roots of true crime can be followed by the mid-1920s for genres, which told crimes in the bundles. However, decades later in the 1990s, a sudden boom in the media of real crime, especially in Hong Kong, saw. At the same time, the boom suggests that the genre existed in several media and has already gained some importance. If we turn our attention to the United States, then we should recognize the glorious, suspicious documentation book that helped establish the genre. Indeed, the work of Truman Capote since 1965 "in cold blood" has popularized the true crime by creating a niche that will continue to become anger in the coming years. But between Capote's prototype book and The rapid influx of real crime works after 2014There was a 1985 crime thriller that predicts our current obsession with the genre.

Ad

Directed by Philip Borsos, the "Mid -season" does not show its frightening story from the point of view of amateur real crime obsessive. Instead, the film makes us privacy of the stressful internal life of the Miami -based crime rapporteur Malcolm Anderson (Kurt Russell), who feels terribly exhausted and burned after covering the fiercest crimes in the city. Only when he decides to take a step back, however, Malcolm is drawn into a particularly gross murder that blurred the lines between his personal involvement and his professional status as an objective bystander.

Spoilers For the "middle season" to follow.

When Malcolm is involved in another murder case, he approaches him as just another routine investigation calling for fact -based newspapers, competent newspaper reporting (a kind of helping to pay bills). However, the serial killer in question, Alan Delur (Richard Jordandan), makes an unexpected move: he chooses Malcolm to serve him as a mouth and use it to publish his next victims as part of a painful game with cats and mice with frustrated police and media. While these species of killed fame are unheard of, Jordanordan brings an eerie to Alan, who occupies disturbing soft speech behavior while talking to Malcolm by phone. Alan is attracted to Malcolm's cold intellect as a rapporteur who notices the things others overlook, while the latter develops a morbid fascination with the killer who chose the cherry from hundreds.

Ad

Malcolm has complicated motivations, too, because his involvement in Alan is much more intimate than his daily tasks as a rapporteur. It has the advantage of being the only person who can tell the rest of the world more about Alan's wicked mind, because Malcolm can essentially create any narrative that sells. However, over time, Malcolm realizes that Alan is not the only addict of fame, as our once burnt -out rapporteur suddenly feels rejuvenated than the ability to be noticed. Those around him, like his girlfriend Christine (Mariel Hemingway), believe that Malcolm will eventually do the right thing, but that does not prevent them from worrying about his state of mind. But, above all, the "middle season" asks an essential question: what are the chances that the rapporteur will actually adhere to their ethics when the sensational Baylova is within reach?

Ad

The "middle season" is not perfect, as parts of the story make a bad imitation of how the newspaper reporting is in real life (or, at least, how it was in '85). Not to mention, Hemingway's Christine is written as a stereotypical boredom girl - the one whose valid worries are presented as a none and an obstacle to Malcolm's search. However, after we overlook these aspects, the story of the film feels tight and smart, with focus The connection between real crime and its increasingly unhealthy public consumption. By the time Malcolm crosses the very line that was supposed to defend it, it's a little late for him.