Watch West of Memphis For Free

People are voting emotionally.

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

First of all, if you have seen the 3 Paradise Lost films or the 48 Hours coverage there is nothing new here. The film explains yet again why the WM3 are innocents - which is difficult to doubt - and tries to find another suspect, like Paradise Lost 3 did with Byer. Even if the man in question is guilty, it should not be up to a film to make accusations and substitute itself to a court of law. Paradise Lost 3 proved you can easily be wrong, even if all the evidences seems to be there. A lot of questions about he film itself are left unanswered, like why we see almost exclusively Damien and so few of Jason and Jessie. Did they refuse to participate? Were they left aside by the production? The implication of Peter Jackson and his wife is weird too; listening to him we have the impression he financed and directed all the process leading to the liberation of the 3. Moreover, a lot of things are pointless, especially the part with Stevie Branch sister's. What are we to make of her ordeal? She had a difficult life, but it doesn't prove anything. Last but not least, the film is incredibly badly filmed and edited. I don't remember having seen so many useless images in a documentary in a long time. It is like every time she doesn't have an image that goes with the sound, the filmmaker turns to meaningless images of cars, chairs or whatever. There is no visual imagination here, which is kind of frustrating giving the power of the subject. If you know nothing about the case, this film can work as a summary, but nothing more.

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.

Reading the comments about this documentary I learnt that there had been other films on this subject as part of the decades of trying to overturn the original convictions; this was news to me but, in all honesty, the case itself was news to me as I had never heard of these murders or the wider story. Perhaps I am under a rock but I am not sure how well known this all is outside of the US. Anyways, the film opens in such a way that is a little hard to follow. The murders themselves are clearly presented but a lot of characters and history is delivered and at times I was not wholly sure when certain video clips were from and I felt that it put me off balance a little in terms of context of what was being said. This was a minor problem and gradually I got out of it as the bigger story was made clear.This moved forward well and the film patiently reveals one after another example of bad practice, straight-up deception or implication of misconduct all of which presents a terrible miscarriage of justice. It adds to this by exploring other paths and presenting new evidence in the film – statements, DNA etc, all of which seem to point very clearly to a man who was prone to erratic violence towards one of the boys who was killed. This is hard to watch because it seems so clear while these three sit behind bars. The film doesn't offer justice though – only freedom, and in a way this is both a hard end to the film but also a very apt one because it highlights yet another nonsense. I really didn't see much difference between the original coerced confession and the pleas of "guilty" which are obtained by dangling freedom in front of the three men; to me it sat very badly and it angered me to see the elected official saying this plea had saved the State money by preventing the three from suing. So, even in their freedom they are robbed of what they should have been entitled to – and this guy says it like it is a positive outcome.I didn't know anything about this story when I started the film but it did the job very well of giving me a complex background, getting me up to speed and then delivering a lot of information on the way to the conclusion. The conclusion is that justice wasn't done and continues not to be done even while those in charge talk about how this gives closure to the families etc. Really hard to watch the film without getting angry, and this is to the film's credit.

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.