The god of ratings gave, the god of ratings took, and in the end his uncle Topaz won

Haim Etgar's movie about the last king of the entertainment world is a good and decent movie. The story is mesmerizing, and a challenge, with a subdued submission as usual, avoids the idealization of the man behind the horrific acts, as well as his humiliation. In the end, Topaz continues to provide ratings even a decade after his death, which is probably the moral

The god of ratings gave, the god of ratings took, and in the end his uncle Topaz won

(In the video above: a video from 2010 in which Dudu Topaz's sentence was sentenced)

In one of the moments in his film about his uncle Topaz, the first part of which was broadcast last night in Rainbow 12, Topaz tells how he saw his father as a child, Elijah Goldenberg - himself a pioneer of Hebrew entertainment - getting hit by another person, and how that image was burned in his head. Five decades ahead, it was the son of a spy who saw a thug break his mother's chimney on that boy's mission.

Life is not a circle, it is only we who find symbolism in everything. But it seems that Topaz's story - the biggest TV star of his time to end his life in a criminal case involving the commission of violent assaults by entertainment industry executives - is so full of symbols and reflections impossible to be tempted. Only life can provide such an extraordinary script, all of which fascinates a decade after his death: Beyond the highs and lows, beyond the gap between generosity and violence and the history of vulgar expressions, it's also a story about the world of entertainment and writing and prime time and communication and the gap between the screen To reality.

But it should never be tempted: because behind the script is not only a tragic ending, but also real people who have been severely hurt by violence inflicted on them. Behind the thriller there are shocked characters. The challenge of making a movie about Dudu Topaz is not necessarily how to tell the story - it is an ultimate story anyway - but to keep looking and remembering constantly that the on-screen charismatic hero who seeks our love and mercy is actually, in this episode of his life, the bad man.

It turns out not always shouting: Ayala Hassan's human gesture to Ayman Odeh

The last king of the entertainment world. Dudu Topaz (screenshot)

Exposure with Haim Etgar, Dudu Topaz Case (Photo: Keshet 12, screenshot)

Haim Challenge's long film about the last king of the entertainment world is a decent movie. The story is mesmerizing in itself, and a challenge, in a subdued, usual submission, avoids the idealization of the man behind the horrific deeds, as well as his humiliation: Topaz there, in his infamy and defeat, in a chronicle whose reality really surpasses any imagination, in a blend of confession and denial and confession and denial.

The movie about Topaz is based on the police version and her perspective on the events. He actually takes the investigation, though at length (the two parts of the film amount to almost three hours). Topaz's story may be more deserving - a series that also celebrates the years of success, the conversation about his character after his death, and an examination of his impact on Israeli entertainment in general.

Either way, the challenge has no such pretense. After a flood of articles, films and investigations, he also has no pretense of innovating, displaying a special or unusual angle on the events that have already spilled tens of thousands of words, and not even expressing his own position on them. For this reason, this is not a fascinating journalistic, artistic or otherwise. But it is, as stated, a great story. A challenge is to put together all the pieces he has been able to collect, in order to produce their most complete version available. In doing so, he did a bad job.

Time might change it: Justin Bieber is sinking into a boring life and his new album reflects that

Did a bad job. Challenge (screenshot)

Exposure with Haim Etgar, Dudu Topaz Case (Photo: Keshet 12, screenshot)

This attachment is confusing. It has parts that are attached organically, chronologically. Others are creepy allusions to what's happening behind the scenes. Others may not be more out of context, which the larger story has attracted in completely prosaic circumstances. Art work, random conversations, black jokes and media encounters - everything is woven into a deceptive dance of the public figure in the face of his feelings and actions in the criminal aspect. Countless lies through which Topaz repeatedly discovered the truth.

This confusion reflects a feeling that emerges from Topaz quotes throughout the film, which teach a person that the boundaries between the entertainment world, the stage and the camera, and his or her personal life - were completely blurred. A person who saw himself as a protagonist of a movie, novel or series that had not yet been written, and identified with this hero until there was no apparent difference at all. It seems that despite his desire to believe it, there were no two uncle Topaz, an Ehud TV star and one who initiated violent counterparts of his colleague. It was completely the same person.

There were no two. Topaz (screenshot)

Exposure with Haim Etgar, Dudu Topaz Case (Photo: Keshet 12, screenshot)

A central axis of the story is Topaz's preoccupation, which seems obsessed, in the way he is being reviewed, with his criticisms of him and his rage at the journalists who have written about him. So when he broke Meir Schnitzer's glasses, so when he filmed himself waiting for Raanan Shaked at the door of his house to invite him into a physical confrontation, he told the audience of his screaming spectators in the face of the bullied act against a journalist. Truth: The Topaz movie raises thoughts of the media's role in Topaz's decline, and its awareness of what's going on over the harsh side of airborne words. On the other hand, he also demonstrates how high the price of hate for the media and what kind of chasm it may fall.

But most of all, it is a rainbow that pervades this soul-searching today. She is the one to whom Topaz reached his peak; She is the one whose chair - Avi Nir, who is not actually interviewed in the film - was attacked by him; And she's the one who airs the movie a decade later.

And in the meantime, Topaz, at least in his entertainment context, won: the prime time is full of "unapologetic" characters; The entire culture is a growing addiction to virtual or television love affaires, likes, followers and collaborations; And those who find themselves outside the central media avenge themselves on alternative stages on social networks; Topaz would love 2020, no doubt.

And here, whoever burned his life's work and lost his life because of his desperate attempt to get his place back on television, returned to prime time. The franchisee who refused to allow it then, whose buildings are adjacent to the police station where the case was investigated, will surely celebrate the ratings this morning that Topaz continues to bring her a decade after his death. That's probably the moral: over time, everything is forgiven for the sake of commercial television's canned system. The god of ratings gave, the god of ratings took, and somewhere, this is the moment when the screen really comes down to the story of the fall of who was the king of ratings.