Most of British director Mick Jackson‘s films are TV productions. However, those who look at his filmography will find that among his few films for the big screen are two big Hollywood blockbusters: ‘The Bodyguard‘ (1992) and ‘Volcano‘ (1997). But these are exceptions. When he made ‘Denial‘ in 2016, Mick Jackson returned to a format more suited to television, although the film was intended for the big screen and ran in theaters. The BBC is also a co-producer. It’s a courtroom drama that tackles a topic that ostensibly belongs to history – the Holocaust and its deniers – but which is actually extremely current. We could even say that it became even more relevant after the release of the film, in a period of offensive of conspiracy theories and alternative truths. The film is based on a real case, one in which David Irving, the British author of several books about Hitler and Nazi Germany and a Holocaust denier, sued in the year 2000 the American historian Deborah Lipstadt for libel, because she had criticized his statements in a book, questioning his qualifications as a historian. Based on another book written by Lipstadt after the trial, and using the records and documents of the trial, ‘Denial‘ gained authenticity but at the same time had to face the risks of docudramas.
The film is divided into two parts: the preparation for the trial and the trial itself. Irving chose to sue in England because here, unlike in the United States and other parts of the world, the party accused of defamation must prove not only that its critical statements are accurate, but that there was an intention on the part of the criticized author to write untruths. Knowing the British judicial system well, the team of lawyers chosen by the publishing house Penguin who had published the book decided to adopt a surprising tactic. First, they accepted that the case should be tried before a single judge and not a jury. Second, they decided, unlike other similar trials, that Holocaust survivors should not be called to testify. Holocaust deniers would gain credibility that they did not deserve if they were allowed to question the facts related by the witnesses and further torment them in public, they argued. This tactic presented a dilemma for the heroine. It could be interpreted as an avoidance of confrontation and seemed to deny the victims their right to express themselves. In hindsight, legally, it proved to be the right tactic, but it also deprived the cinematic spectacle of some of the courtroom confrontations and the impact of direct testimony. To emotionally compensate in the story, the scriptwriters inserted a scene where the legal team visits the Auschwitz death camp. A professional visit for some of them (‘at the scene of the crime’), a dramatic confrontation with the past for others.
The film benefits from some exceptional acting performances. Rachel Weisz is sensitive and passionate in the title role, balancing personal involvement with a determination to bring the truth to light and a refusal to compromise. Tom Wilkinson gives substance and color to the role of the lead lawyer. The most outstanding acting performance, however, belongs to
Timothy Spall as David Irving. Negative roles are always difficult, even more so when it comes to a charismatic and intelligent individual who puts his qualities in the service of harmful ideologies. Spall manages to bring the character to life, to explain the fascination it generates for some, but also the reasons why any decent person must refuse to legitimize the actions of such characters. As one of the film’s characters says, when it comes to obvious, scientific or historical truths, there is no room for compromise and alternative opinions. Precisely in order to defend freedom of expression, truth must be separated from lies. Mick Jackson‘s ‘Denial‘ successfully pleads this case, to also borrow from legal vocabulary. A film for the big screen or for television? It is less important, as the important message reaches viewers in both distribution formats.