Jump to content

DISCLAIMER* - Apple TV+ Series, Oct 11, Cate Blanchett, Kevin Kline, Written/Directed by Alfonso Cuarón


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)


DISCLAIMER* is a gripping psychological thriller in seven chapters, starring Academy Award winners Cate Blanchett and Kevin Kline. Written and directed by five-time Academy Award winner Alfonso Cuarón, DISCLAIMER* is based on the best-selling novel of the same name by Renée Knight.

Plot:

Spoiler

Acclaimed journalist Catherine Ravenscroft (Blanchett) built her reputation revealing the misdeeds and transgressions of others. When she receives a novel from an unknown author, she is horrified to realize she is now the main character in a story that exposes her darkest secrets.

As Catherine races to uncover the writer’s true identity, she is forced to confront her past before it destroys both her own life and her relationships with her husband Robert (Sacha Baron Cohen) and their son Nicholas (Kodi Smit-McPhee). The ensemble cast includes Lesley Manville, Louis Partridge, Leila George, Hoyeon, and features Indira Varma as the narrator.

Hailing from Apple Studios, DISCLAIMER* is co-produced by Esperanto Filmoj and Anonymous Content. Cuarón executive produces for Esperanto Filmoj alongside Gabriela Rodriguez. In addition to starring, Blanchett serves as executive producer. David Levine and the late Steve Golin executive produce for Anonymous Content. Academy Award winner Emmanuel Lubezki, Donald Sabourin and Carlos Morales also executive produce. Renée Knight serves as co-executive producer. Lubezki and Academy Award nominee Bruno Delbonnel serve as directors of photography. The score is composed by multiple Academy and GRAMMY Award winner Finneas O’Connell.


 

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • atomheartbevo changed the title to DISCLAIMER* - Apple TV+ Series, Oct 11, Cate Blanchett, Kevin Kline, Written/Directed by Alfonso Cuarón
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

From USA Today:

Spoiler

"Disclaimer" tells a story about a story, specifically the consequences of events that transpired between a 19-year-old British kid, Jonathan (Louis Partridge), and a young mother, Catherine (Leila George), on an Italian beach in the 2000s. The details of the encounter aren't immediately clear, but by the end, Jonathan is dead and Catherine never tells a soul what happened. Twenty years later, modern-day Catherine (Blanchett) becomes the obsession of Jonathan's father Stephen (Kline). The old man discovers what he believes to be evidence of Catherine's role in Jonathan's death, and is eager for revenge and catharsis after losing Jonathan and later, his grieving wife Nancy (Lesley Manville). With very little care for collateral damage, he lashes out in destructive, disturbing ways.

 

Edited by 4th&Five
Posted

Love Kevin Kline in, among other things I Love You to Death, which is way underrated. 1990 Best Picture - Driving Miss Daisy - nope. Best Actor - Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot - no arguing that one. That's one, arguably two, Oscars that should be on the Kline pile of win

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
On 10/11/2024 at 7:24 PM, mr. sunshine said:

Love Kevin Kline in, among other things I Love You to Death, which is way underrated. 1990 Best Picture - Driving Miss Daisy - nope. Best Actor - Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot - no arguing that one. That's one, arguably two, Oscars that should be on the Kline pile of win

What a fabulous window treatment

IMG_8184.jpeg.c63d4b1667a8eba9f87160d56a303981.jpeg

Posted
6 hours ago, A-Tex Devil said:

Has Sasha Baron Cohen ever played such a down the middle “normal” role? I smell a twist with that character. Just through 1st episode. 

I heard he was great in The Spy which was another recent straight role. 

Posted
49 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I heard he was great in The Spy which was another recent straight role. 

I was having the same thought, but remembered this.  He was solid in The Spy, very solid.

Posted

leila george is obviously extremely sexy in this show when she's not being a vindictive sociopath. 

i have enjoyed it for the most part. 

Spoiler

i wonder if they are going to connect nicholas becoming such a fuck up loser to some sort of trauma of watching his mom riding some random's face.

 

Posted
Spoiler

Man, that turned really bad for that dude QUICKLY. One second he's smashing a smoking hot blonde in the bathroom, and the next he's drowning in the ocean. While she lets it happen. After he just saved her son's life. Fucked up scene and hard to watch.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:
  Hide contents

Man, that turned really bad for that dude QUICKLY. One second he's smashing a smoking hot blonde in the bathroom, and the next he's drowning in the ocean. While she lets it happen. After he just saved her son's life. Fucked up scene and hard to watch.

 

Agree.  She could have chosen me though and I would have gone ahead to Rome.  And maybe not drownded.

Posted

Finally caught up on this show. Can’t decide if I like it. Feels like a mix of The Affair with Big Little Lies.

So far, the plot is a little boring to me. Married woman and teenager have affair, teenager drowns, and years later the teenager’s parents seek vengeance by publishing a book to torment the adulteress. Nothing about that is all that groundbreaking, but we still have 3 episodes to go, so we shall see.

Posted

My biggest issue is how so many of the finer details of the Italy trip are known so well by the parents.  For instance - that she let the kid die via silence.   It makes me wonder if the flashbacks are actually an unreliable narrator.  The version the parents think happened.   
 

And they keep hammering the point that the Katherine character dies in the book.  That I am sure will mean something at some point. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
My biggest issue is how so many of the finer details of the Italy trip are known so well by the parents.  For instance - that she let the kid die via silence.   It makes me wonder if the flashbacks are actually an unreliable narrator.  The version the parents think happened.   
 
And they keep hammering the point that the Katherine character dies in the book.  That I am sure will mean something at some point. 

“I bet he ate her pussy, like all the time.”
Posted
That’s exactly what I assume the story is. Nancy’s version of events that she used to grieve Jonathan. 

I assume that as well, but Nancy was consumed by grief and bitterness, so watching a story entirely through that lens is underwhelming. I’m hoping there will be some kind of twist or reveal similar to Atonement, where we realize that the story we’ve been fed is deliberately untrue and there is a deeper explanation.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I thought the series started so strong and the last few episodes have been just ok. I’m assuming Catherine will finally get everyone to realize that the book is just some old lady’s delusional stories she made up and then Catherine gets to go John Wick on everyone. That is the only way to save this sniveling series.

Posted
I thought the series started so strong and the last few episodes have been just ok. I’m assuming Catherine will finally get everyone to realize that the book is just some old lady’s delusional stories she made up and then Catherine gets to go John Wick on everyone. That is the only way to save this sniveling series.

Also I thought the background acting in the group scenes was almost laughably bad - the beach rescue and the office confrontation. Everyone clutching the book and their pearls as they record with their phones.
Posted

I'm still into it, but share many of the criticisms that have been levied in this thread. 

1) How would the dead kid's mom know the details of the affair and that she was complicit in the death of her son. It doesn't make sense. They're gonna have to fill in the gaps here for the show to satisfactorily resolve.

2) It started strong but it's sputtering a bit here in the last episode and there are some inconsistencies that are hard to believe. For instance, Kevin Cline shows up at her office, provides copies of the book for the whole office to read, they read the book while Catherine is on her way into the office, and they all believed what was written in the book before they aggressively confront her when she shows up for work? Yeah, I'm not buying it. No time to read the book and she'd get the benefit of the doubt from all of these colleagues that supposedly admired her brilliance. 

3) There aren't really any likeable characters. Even with Kevin Cline's character, I want to say "let it go, man. he's been dead for 20 years"

Posted
2) It started strong but it's sputtering a bit here in the last episode and there are some inconsistencies that are hard to believe. For instance, Kevin Cline shows up at her office, provides copies of the book for the whole office to read, they read the book while Catherine is on her way into the office, and they all believed what was written in the book before they aggressively confront her when she shows up for work? Yeah, I'm not buying it. No time to read the book and she'd get the benefit of the doubt from all of these colleagues that supposedly admired her brilliance. 


Catherine could definitely handle this situation better and minimize the damage. With regards to work, she should claim the book is entirely fiction. Maybe concede that she had met Johnathan in Italy but deny that anything ever happened and adamantly deny any involvement in his death (which btw is entirely speculative from everyone except her). The Italian police cleared her of any wrongdoing at the time, so the only thing against her is a bitter father who wasn’t there and couldn’t possibly know what happened. His book is fan fiction revenge at that point.

The pictures are somewhat damning but she could either say Johnathan stole them from her, or just admit that she had an affair 20 years ago, which would look bad but hardly career ending. Just deny deny deny on his death because how could she actually be guilty of a guy drowning at sea while she is on land with her traumatized child? The way she is now portrayed as completely helpless is a little annoying.

Also, she has an accomplished career and all it takes is for some stranger to show up with a book he claims is about her, and then her staff runs her out of the office with minimal discussion while multiple employees video her breakdown, all within a couple of hours. That would go down much differently in real life.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

3) There aren't really any likeable characters. Even with Kevin Cline's character, I want to say "let it go, man. he's been dead for 20 years"


I like him the least.

Assuming the events we’ve seen in the past are true, Catherine is a pretty despicable person. She was an unfaithful wife and a negligent mother, and she possibly watched a person drown without signaling for help. But we don’t even know if the version of the past we’re seeing is true, because it’s being told from Nancy’s book.

By comparison, Stephen is using his dead wife’s questionable accounting of a tragedy to strategically ruin the lives of multiple strangers. Even if Nancy somehow knew the truth, his reaction to this information is psychopathic. He seems to develop some sadistic pleasure from watching the trapped bug die inside the glass, so maybe that’s just who he is now.
Posted
8 hours ago, irishtexan said:

1) How would the dead kid's mom know the details of the affair and that she was complicit in the death of her son. It doesn't make sense. They're gonna have to fill in the gaps here for the show to satisfactorily resolve.

Yeah, the entire premise of the show to this point makes no sense. I'm curious how they're going to resolve this. Did Catherine confess everything at some point?

Posted
On 10/25/2024 at 8:08 PM, nycHorn said:


Also I thought the background acting in the group scenes was almost laughably bad - the beach rescue and the office confrontation. Everyone clutching the book and their pearls as they record with their phones.

I feel like a lot of British shows especially British shows on Netflix drip with this overly dramatic, over the top element. They sort of suck at subtlety.

Posted

One thing that bugs me, even if Nancy's "narration" is 100% accurate, it's a stretch to blame Catherine for Jonathan's death.  Which just demonstrates that Nancy and Stephen are fucking psychos and lose all sympathy for losing their son.

At worst, Catherine is a bit of a whore.

Posted
On 10/29/2024 at 11:07 AM, wild_turkey said:

Also, she has an accomplished career and all it takes is for some stranger to show up with a book he claims is about her, and then her staff runs her out of the office with minimal discussion while multiple employees video her breakdown, all within a couple of hours. That would go down much differently in real life.

 

Yeah, the office immediately taking the side of the shabby, disheveled, paranoid old man...okay.gif. that sequence was bad.

Posted

I’m hoping there will be some kind of twist or reveal similar to Atonement, where we realize that the story we’ve been fed is deliberately untrue and there is a deeper explanation.


Well it seems to be headed in that direction, which I enjoy, and will quite possibly redeem the series for me.

I do get frustrated with certain scenes that seem to be sloppy writing or directing. Catherine’s breakdown at the office was a good example.

In this most recent episode, I have a very hard time believing that an altercation could occur in an ICU and the hospital staff would take the side of an unidentified disheveled old man over the actual mother of the patient. Not enough questions were asked there and she got swept away with way too little of a fight.

Also, in his house, he crushes up sleeping pills and mixes them into her tea while she watches from 10 feet away. I suppose they need that plot device, but come on. She’s paranoid enough to be holding a knife but she’s aloof enough to not pay attention to what he’s doing and to also accept tea from this deranged old man who is ruining her life? Don’t even get me started on the nurse who said he should only take 1 pill but gave him 10 pills. Just sloppy and surely with a little effort they could write that better.
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted

I bumped on all the same stuff.  Hoping there's some kind of cool twist beyond the obvious unreliable narrator reveal. Would that even count as a twist? The show doesn't seem to be attempting to obscure the fact that we've been getting the book version of events.

 

Posted
19 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

 


Well it seems to be headed in that direction, which I enjoy, and will quite possibly redeem the series for me.

I do get frustrated with certain scenes that seem to be sloppy writing or directing. Catherine’s breakdown at the office was a good example.

In this most recent episode, I have a very hard time believing that an altercation could occur in an ICU and the hospital staff would take the side of an unidentified disheveled old man over the actual mother of the patient. Not enough questions were asked there and she got swept away with way too little of a fight.

Also, in his house, he crushes up sleeping pills and mixes them into her tea while she watches from 10 feet away. I suppose they need that plot device, but come on. She’s paranoid enough to be holding a knife but she’s aloof enough to not pay attention to what he’s doing and to also accept tea from this deranged old man who is ruining her life? Don’t even get me started on the nurse who said he should only take 1 pill but gave him 10 pills. Just sloppy and surely with a little effort they could write that better.

 

100% agree across the board.

Posted

I was a little slow in realizing it, but I found myself asking in episode 4 or 5 how the mom knew so many details about what actually happened. And then I connected it to the fact that most of Kevin Kline's knowledge of the whole affair came from the book. So then it hit me this was all just some imagined version of the truth, hence the disclaimer title.  

I recall when they saw Jonathon's body they found some mark on his arm.  Has that been explained?  If not, it could be connected to what really happened.  

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

I was a little slow in realizing it, but I found myself asking in episode 4 or 5 how the mom knew so many details about what actually happened. And then I connected it to the fact that most of Kevin Kline's knowledge of the whole affair came from the book. So then it hit me this was all just some imagined version of the truth, hence the disclaimer title.  

I recall when they saw Jonathon's body they found some mark on his arm.  Has that been explained?  If not, it could be connected to what really happened.  

 

Yeah, I knew this relatively early on but it went to the back of my mind until Stephen started trying to kill people.  I don't guess we'll ever know, but I think Stephen was a much more resilient and sane person than Nancy, but she drove him batshit.

Posted

After the finale, I think I like the idea of this series better than the execution. It had a great cast and was beautifully shot. It was an interesting story to tell but the need to conceal Catherine’s version until the very end created some unbelievable situations along the way.

I would expect her to be more defensive and defiant with her husband, son, and job, rather than letting it play out and drive everyone to rock bottom. Maybe that’s a me problem for not being able to put myself in her shoes as a victim who has kept a trauma buried inside herself for 20 years. Perhaps she was so used to hiding it that it was hard to flip a switch and speak her truth.

There’s obviously a statement being made about women suffering rape or abuse and no one believing them, even when the lie is perpetrated by a deranged old man. Her own family and coworkers immediately turned on her. We as viewers were mostly turned against her, although we held out hope for the unreliable narrator twist, which is exactly what happened. The photos were pretty damning until we heard the truth, and that was a necessary part of the story because it made the lie more believable.

My frustration is that I feel like this would almost always play out differently in real life. I like to believe most spouses or coworkers, when presented with a shocking story from a stranger, would pause long enough to say “Tell me what really happened. This stranger wrote a book about you and has nude pictures of you, but I want to hear your explanation.” Or that at the very least, when Robert was kicking her out of the house, there would be a moment when she says “Fuck you, I was raped you asshole, and I need some time to process this before I can explain.” I think those moments did not happen merely for the sake of preserving the twist.

Putting emotion aside, the logical side of everyone’s brain should wonder how Nancy and Stephen could possibly write an accurate version of those events, given that the only 2 people who actually knew, clearly did not tell them. Logic should quickly lead one to question the reliability of the book. As viewers we did that, but I was admittedly confused by the shifting narration between the past and present, and between different characters. As a character in the story, the source material is much more clear, originating from one man and his dead wife, which should have massive alarm bells going off in Robert’s head.

It gets a B+ from me. It would probably be better with a rewatch, but a rewatch would also mean that certain hotel scenes go from being spicy to nauseating, so I doubt I’ll do that. I think it holds up much better than similar series like Presumed Innocent or Defending Jacob.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...