BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

doug_park2001 WEST of MEMPHIS is a very compelling documentary about a huge--and not as uncommon as we'd like to think--apparent miscarriage of justice. The most haunting aspect of the film is how guilty the "Memphis 3" appear during the trial, yet how innocent they seem once certain facts emerge afterward. No matter what really happened in this particular case, WEST of MEMPHIS succeeds in showing how completely innocent people can be routinely convicted of the most heinous crimes imaginable due to corruption and human error, some of it understandable, some of it otherwise. The ease at which prosecutors motivated by their own "professional" or political agendas can distort the truth and elicit confessions from the innocent and vulnerable is truly bone-jarring. Most of us want to believe in the fundamental integrity of America's justice system, which is why cases such as this are so irksomely inconvenient.Having said all of this, I must add the following caveat: It's still entirely possible that the Memphis 3 were guilty all along. I found this film very persuasive at first, but a little further investigation into the matter revealed many new aspects, with much conflicting evidence, to this story. WEST of MEMPHIS really stacks the cards in only covering the "these poor, innocent,misunderstood boys" side of things.This documentary is long and detailed, which is obviously helpful in allowing the audience to understand how everything supposedly happened. Still, it may prove a little ponderous for the more casual viewer. There are some very disturbing images--crime scene photos of the eight-year-old victims, etc--as well as blunt descriptions of the mutilations done to the bodies. The film is tasteful as possible, however, in what it shows/does not show.

henxan I accidentally happened upon this documentary, and I have to say, I am not very fond of documentaries because - if good - they really mess me up. This was one of them, the prime example.One thing has to be said right at the start of my review: I do not know if these men (young men/boys at the time of the crime) are guilty. And that is the entire point of me writing this review - because nobody else have pointed it out explicitly. This movie is about someone being found guilty NOT beyond reasonable doubt, and that is the main pillar of our western judicial system.The reason this film resonates so strongly with me, is that at the same time this crime was committed in the US, a child molestation case exploded in Norway (where I am from). The case was littered with media personalities advocating for hard justice, with inflated charges and extremely bad police-work. If it were not for these similarities with the West Memphis Three case, I may have dismissed this documentary as an art director "gone wild." It is beyond all doubt, that innocent people will be held accountable for crimes which they have not committed - easily deduced from off-the- head statistics. But the strength of our western judicial system, is that one can only be sentenced guilty, when it is beyond every reasonable doubt. In this documentary we are presented with a case in which reasonable doubt is sacrificed on the altar of public opinion and preconceived notions. As I said earlier in this review, I do not know if these three men were guilty of the crimes to which they were sentenced - but I do recognize a perversion of justice and a sentence made on weak evidence. Amid all the turmoil which the accused are put through, this documentary still manages to portray the pain and anguish the victims families have to go through, and present it in a dignified manner.For me, this was a documentary true to its genre, because it was no winners, only losers, and as a viewer you feel like one.

Sindre Kaspersen American screenwriter, producer and documentary filmmaker Amy J. Berg's second documentary feature which she co-wrote with screenwriter and film editor Billy McMillin and co-produced, premiered in the Documentary Premieres section at the 28th Sundance Film Festival in 2012, was screened in the Mavericks section at the 37st Toronto International Film Festival in 2012, was shot on location in USA and is an American production which was produced by producers Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Damien Echols and Lorri Davis. It tells the story about American 16-year-old Charles Jason Baldwin, American 17-year-old Jessie Lloyd Misskelley Jr and American 18-year-old Michael Wayne Echols who in June, 1993 in the city of West Memphis in the state of Arkansas in Crittenden county, USA was arrested for the triple homicide of three 8-year-old boys named Michael Moore, Steve Branch and Christopher Byers whose bodies were found by a former Juvenile officer named Steve Jones and a policeman named Mike Allen in a pond in the Robin Hood Hills.Distinctly and subtly directed by American filmmaker Amy J. Berg, this fourth documentary about the now well-known West Memphis Three which was preceded by American filmmakers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky's "Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills" (1996), "Paradise Lost 2: Revelations" (2000) and "Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory" (2011), is narrated from multiple viewpoints, draws a more multidimensional portrayal of the place where two young men were sentenced to life imprisonment and one to death by the Arkansas Supreme Court in the year of 1994, focuses mostly on the story of Damien Echols and reexamines the case which has engaged filmmakers, actors, musicians, journalists, defense attorneys, activists and people from all over the world in a common action to get the three men who become preys of a satirical judicial system exonerated. While notable for its distinct and atmospheric milieu depictions and the sterling cinematography by French cinematographer Maryse Alberti and Irish cinematographer Ronan Killeen, this narrative-driven retelling of a criminal case which began two decades from today, which as the former documentaries proves how horrible things can turn out when people in power decides to play almighty and self-righteously impose their judgment on people they regard as inferior and which deprived the freedom of three American citizens and isolated them from the civilized society for eighteen years, introduces new interviews, theories and stories and contains a timely score by Australian musicians and composers Nick Cave and Warren Ellis.This investigative, educational and scrutinizing study of a 20th and 21st century tragedy which is set mostly in the American South and which through a wide range of conversations with people who has, still is and will always be connected to the case describes the significance of the media and politics in this matter and points pretty clearly as to who the real perpetrator might be, is impelled and reinforced by its fragmented narrative structure, subtle continuity and nuanced style of filmmaking. A lyrical, philosophical, humane and informative documentary feature which brings forth unheard voices, acknowledges the many people who stood by the three convicted boys who became the earliest and most accessible targets of hatred and condemnation until their arduous and disregarded call for justice prevailed and underlines how a pivotal union between a once aspiring magician and a woman who dedicated her life to a man on death row was born in the midst of this real life horror story which began on a day in May, 1993 when three boys went missing.

MattJJW In 1993 three young boys are found in a ditch, bound and mutilated. The local police, desperate for a conviction, make a connection between the marks on the dead children's bodies and Satanic rituals. Before long suspicion falls on three local teenagers, and in particular, Damien Echols, who with his died black hair, stands out from the rest of the community. At the 1993 trial, evidence of Echols interest with Satanic symbols surfaces, which, along with a confession from Jessie Misskelley, is enough to convict all three, and in Damien's case, bring a death sentence.Over the following 15 years, doubt over the convictions grows, and fanned by several celebrities taking up the cause (Eddie Vedder, Jonny Depp among them), eventually force the Arkansas state to re-look at the case.This documentary, produced by Peter Jackson, and directed by Amy Berg, is more than just a skillful re-telling of the story, from the original trial through to the eventual final judgement. Far from just reporting the defence campaign, the film-makers get involved in the campaign, helping organise DNA analysis, and setting-up a strong case against another member of the family for the killings.The film gradually dismantles the original prosecution case, pointing out the lack of the teenagers DNA evidence at the crime scene, explaining that far from sexual mutilation, the dead children's injuries were actually post mortem, from snapper turtles, living in the creek. In the final third of the film, having done a convincing job of un-picking the evidence, the film makers pull out a final card. Using new DNA techniques, they test the single strand of hair found in the shoelaces used to tie up one of the victims. It's found to belong to one of the dead children's step father's, Terry Hobbs. The film then focuses on Hobbs, using interviews with his estranged wife and family to accuse him of being a child sex abuser, one with a violent temper, and jealous of the attention his step-son was receiving from his partner.Eventually, in 2012, the District Attorney strikes a deal, that grants the convicted teenagers freedom, in return for their guilty plea, thereby avoiding a costly re-trial and compensation. It's an un-satisfactory legal outcome, but one that Misskelley, Echols and Baldwin understandably elect to take-up, and finally secure their freedom after 15 years of incarceration.This is undoubtedly a very skillful documentary, which after a slow start, grows into a riveting story, with twists in the evidence and the legal process with up to the end. But it's a one sided affair, and the film-makers direct involvement with the campaign, muddies the waters, and asks the viewer to take their side.While probable that there was mis-carriage of justice, or at the very least, that the convictions were "unsafe and unsatisfactory", the film and the case leave significant ambiguity behind. Some of the parents of the dead children still firmly believe that the real killers were indeed the ones that were found guilty back in 1993, and Terry Hobb's is left with the finger of suspicion hanging over him, never to be proved or dis-proved for the rest of his life.