Lovesusti
The Worst Film Ever
Sarita Rafferty
There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.
Dana
An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.
Bryan Kluger
I've been following this case ever since HBO aired the first 'Paradise Lost' film in 1996. I was 15 then, and at the age, I was outraged and angry at how the justice system was working in Arkansas. I couldn't believe that these people could convict three innocent young men with no evidence to life in prison, with one receiving the death penalty. Needless to say, over the years, i have researched and tried to help any way that I could to this case by sending emails and letters and really anything I could do in my power to help free the West Memphis 3. And fortunately, there were two more sequels done by the original team who made 'Paradise Lost', which shed new light on the convictions. However, now, director Amy Berg delivers 'West of Memphis' with the help of Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh, which offers many new insights and interviews for the audience who have followed this case from the beginning, while letting newcomers in easily. It's one of the better documentaries ever made.I'm sure some of you might say, "why is this even being made?" Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky already made the three 'Paradise Lost' documentaries, which chronicled the three men's trials, prison sentence, and their ultimate release for prison 18 years later. You can rest easy to know that Berg pays homage and gives credit to the 'Paradise Lost' films almost immediately and does so throughout the 2 and a half hour documentary, and even goes further than the original filmmakers did.It starts out with the actual footage of the police officers finding the three murdered children, which this beginning acts more as a recount of why Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, and Jason Baldwin are in prison. The year is 1994 in West Memphis, Arkansas, and we see a montage of dialogue and video of their first trial and their convictions, which ends with Echols smiling from the back of a police car as he's hauled away. For some people not familiar with the case, it would be easy to see why these boys were convicted.From here we fast forward 15 years later with millions of people around the world out to free these three innocent men who are still in prison. Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh (famous for 'The Lord of the Rings' trilogy), heard about this case and immediately wanted to help. So in 2005, they called the right people and financially supported new DNA testing, new investigations into the trial, and even getting new hearings based on the evidence they were finding. Some of their researched turned up that while back in 1994 at their trial, it was said that satanic ritual killings were used on the three children, but that the evidence showed that their bodies were being eaten by animals as they laid in the water. They even did live tests to show that turtles were the particular animal that caused all of the scratches and bite marks on the children.The documentary also focuses on Echols' time in prison and how he met Lorri Davis, a woman who wrote to him in prison and eventually married and are still together to this day and living in New York. Lorri has worked on the case for a long time and was a big part of organizing the world wide awareness of the injustice of the West Memphis 3.There is also a very big chunk of the documentary devoted to Terry Hobbs, the stepfather of one of the victims, who we learn is the prime suspect in the murders and is still walking free today. Through Berg's documentary, she unravels some harsh and very shocking truths about Hobbs and how the West Memphis police never thought he could be a suspect. However, that's not the case as new testimony made from a tip line in 2012 suggests that Hobbs was the killer and that they had evidence.Well, we all know the story and how the state of Arkansas, in order to avoid the shame and humility and loss of millions of dollars, told the three men that they could go free if they pleaded guilty, which is called the Alford Plea. And we see some of the degenerate Arkansas politicians who were wanting to close this case with much quickness as to avoid any possible embarrassment and says that he still believes the three men are guilty because they pleaded guilty in order to get out of jail, which made the entire audience gasp and yell.Berg pulls at our heart strings for these three once young teenagers who are all now in their 40s and have spent 18 years in prison for crimes they did not commit. If you see one documentary this season, see 'West of Memphis'. It will stay with you forever.
samb8
My first thought after viewing this documentary was how could three innocent youths be charged/convicted/sentenced to this crime based on the post trial evidence I'm viewing? It's really tragic if these three are innocent. But what if the guy who directed this film, the clear leader of the three, actually duped the justice system. He befriended two boys who are clearly less intelligent, and appear to be very manipulative. When he's being interviewed in prison, he expresses his interest in magic and his desire to be considered the best at this craft. He finds a young women in whom he bears his soul and they connect. Over time he gets some influential people in his corner. Serious doubts based on lack of evidence, specifically DNA, plus some focus now on Hobbs, the stepfather who's at the very least abusing his step children. The bodies of the boys are found in the water perhaps damaging the chance for some/any DNA recovery from the actual perp(s)sans the hair from Hobbs. But since Stevie lived with Hobbs it is possible a transfer occurred not related to the crime. Hobbs would be an easy target to manipulate, he's unable to answer some of questions with a logical answer even if it were a lie. Damien Echols is an odd character in my opinion, capable of manipulating the other two boys easily. Capable of creating the illusion of innocence with the people that got involved on his behalf. Did a guilty man actually get himself off death row by creating the illusion of misjustice? Quite a magic trick, among the best if he did.
tomgillespie2002
The 'West Memphis 3' were first brought to my attention back in 2007/2008 when I viewed the astonishingly eye-opening documentary Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996), which I watched back-to-back with its sequel Revelations: Paradise Lost 2 (2000). The case was so fascinating due to its unbelievable revelations of the flaws in the American justice system that I was more than happy to spend over 5 enthralling hours of my night watching it unravel. Those films brought mass attention to the case, due to the fact that the three accused - Damien Wayne Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley - were so blatantly innocent of this terrible crime. I assumed justice would prevail, and it soon left my mind. So it was shocking to learn upon the release of the third instalment of the trilogy, Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory (2011), and this, West of Memphis, that these three were still in prison, 19 years after the murders, with everything from mere bureaucracy and political motivations standing in their, and thousands of others, way.For those unacquainted with the case, back in 1993, the mutilated bodies of three young boys - Christopher Byers, Steven Branch and Michael Moore - were found in a stream in the Robin Hood Hills, West Memphis. With no evidence, prosecutors quickly deemed the murders a result of Satanic ritual, due to (apparently) sexual mutiliation, and sought out any locals known to practise such an art. They were given the names of three youngsters, Echols, Baldwin and Miskelley, who were known to listen to heavy metal music and act much like your typical isolated, 'gothic' teenagers. Through manipulation of the jury, and a trial by media, the three were quickly convicted (again, with no evidence against them, apart from a heavily dubious 'confession' by the borderline mentally retarded Misskelley). They were given life, with Echols possibly facing the death sentence. Interest in the case quickly gathered, due to many aspects not making any sense, and gathered support of musicians such as Metallica, Henry Rollins, Patti Smith, and Eddie Vedder of Pearl Jam. West of Memphis focuses on the fight to free the West Memphis 3, with new evidence gathered and possibly a revelation as to who the killer may actually be.West of Memphis doesn't spend much time treading the same ground as the Paradise Lost trilogy, and quickly covers the original trial. It consists mainly of original footage, such as the lawyers and investigators funded by supporters of the West Memphis 3 and various celebrities such as the film's producers Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh trying to find fresh evidence in favour of the 3, and footage of the various concerts designed to raise awareness and make money. But where West of Memphis truly invigorates is the alarming case built against Terry Hobbs, stepfather of Steven Branch, who was all but ignored by police in the original investigation. Paradise Lost 2 brought up the possibility of another stepfather, John Mark Byers, being the culprit, but often felt like he was a suspect due to him simply being quite strange, which seems hypocritical considering the West Memphis 3 were convicted for the same reason. But there is strong evidence against Hobbs, such as a violent past, the lack of an alibi during the time of the deaths, and his hair being found within the knot of the shoelaces to which the three boys were hog-tied with.Above all, West of Memphis is a staunch reminder of the darkness of this case. This was a horrific crime, almost beyond belief (and the sights of the three corpses really hammers this home), and an equally disturbing path of 'justice' that followed. This is a deep, dark stain on the American justice system, where political aspirations, ignorance and outright lying stand in the way of true justice. They do walk free in the end, but not without leaving a bitter taste in the mouth. They had 19 years of their life stolen from them, yet to be free they must plead guilty to a crime everyone knows they did commit. In the eyes of the law, the West Memphis 3 are child murderers, while the real murderer walks free with a clean name. The Paradise Lost films and West of Memphis, if anything, are a testament to the power of film, along with Errol Morris' The Thin Blue Line (1988), which exposed police ineptitude and helped set an innocent man free, but above all else, they are a terrifying and utterly depressing indictment of a country that needs to take a good look at itself.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
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.
