A grab bag approach to choosing movies.

Mass-market movies rarely appeal to me.   I’m drawn to stories that reveal a personal or distinctive voice.  Production companies are interested in appealing to the broadest audiences and in-turn making the most money possible as soon as possible.  They want the opposite: movies that appeal to the masses.  Personal, distinctive or hard-to-category stories just don’t fly there.

Foreign Letters

People usually forget about or ignore independent, documentary and short films, even though the best stories are often compelling and memorable.  They receive so little publicity that they lay or languish below America’s pop cultural radar.  Well below it.

I was grateful a few years ago it dawned on me just what kind of eclectic selection I could have in movies if I simply visited my local library a couple time a week!  While the feature-length movies are supposed to be organized by genre, after borrowers’ hands touch them they don’t stay so strictly organized.  That makes it adventurous.

I’ve found several films that way, which I might not or flatly would not have noticed if I’d relied on a social media queue or searched for those, which my friends recommend.

I recently discovered Foreign Letters, which documents the childhood bond between two almost teenaged American immigrants.  Their bond helped to insulate them from the cruelties that children can levy on one another.  And it stuck with or sustained them into their adult lives.  Most children know what it’s like to move to a strange place, be the new kid and have to carve out a new social life.  The girls’ story is sweet, smart, perceptive and dramatic.  Rare!

You just don’t find these stories at your local mall’s multiplex anymore!

hollywood sign index

While social media movie queues have their places, there is a pleasure, an old-school (or maybe just mid-20th century) pleasure in the randomness and adventure of watching what a grab bag give you.  A grab bag approach to choosing movies is a fun and novel way to accidently find some of the best and most unappreciated films you might not have otherwise found.  You could probably do this via Facebook or Flixster, but those media lack the hands-on and face-to-face satisfaction that I appreciate.

American Movie-Goers Miss Out by Letting Foreign Movies Pass Them By

Recently a great friend asked me about “The Artist,” the French- and Belgian-made film from 2011, which earned the lastest Academy Award for Best Picture.  Another friend asked me about “A Separation,” from Iran, also from 2011.

Those conversations reminded me about how much I appreciate other foreign films: “Walk on Water,” from 2004, and “The Holy Land,” from 2001.  Both of them are from Israel.

More and more often North American movies rely on other countries’ moneys for success.  If you read movie critics’ columns often enough you know how often American movies depend on foreign rights and revenues in order to be make films, and in-turn profits.

The Artist Poster on the Tube from Annie Mole

I was reminded about films, like those mentioned above, that beg to be recommended to friends.  After having answered one friend’s question about “The Artist,” which I’ve not yet seen, I recommended those Israeli films.

And, yet foreign films seems to strike Americans as strange or out-of the way; literally foreign.  More so than necessary.

Why do so many American movie-goers flock to American-made titles, while also whining about a decline in their quality, value and ingenuity?

  • A common complaint about foreign movies is having to deal with subtitles.
  • Maybe there’s a snob factor, or an assumption that foreign film fans are a club, and you have to pay dues?

Hey.  When you run out of American films you want to watch why not turn to the best ones from France, Israel, the United Kingdom or elsewhere?

Harvey Weinstein’s production, “Bully,” being itself bullied by the motion picture raters

Harvey Weinstein, the legendary man behind The Weinstein Company, and Miramax before that, is talking about his film “Bully” being itself bullied by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA).  That’s America’s largely anonymous movie rating organization.

The crisis: bullying in itself is even more barbaric and cruel in our social media epoch than it used to be.   It devastates youngsters in their formative years.  For a myriad of complicated reasons schools seem disinclined to punish the bullies.

This film aggressively exposes the crisis, and the filmmakers aren’t timid with the profanity that the children use.  The politico-artistic problem: the MPAA disputes how appropriate the profanity in the film is, and in-turn gave “Bully” an R rating.  Historically subtlety is not their friend.  The vital subtlety is about why the use of the “F-word” in different contexts, and stories, for different reasons can have different meanings.

What’s provincial about the MPAA’s sensibilities: consider the words of Chicago Tribune film critic, Michael Phillips.

In the interest of fairness, I am opining without yet having seen the film.  But concerns about the rating associations’ usefulness have persisted at a low hum for years.

This specific dispute has made headlines from Los Angeles, which is often conflated with Hollywood, to the world.

Here’s one argument more potent and memorable than Mr. Phillips’ words: this 2006 documentary “This Film is Not Yet Rated.”

Before the MPAA came, movies were censored by the Motion Picture Production Code, aka the Hays Code, which reigned from 1930 through 1967.  And, then, in 1968, two years after its birth, the Association established and offered basic sense ratings.  But that basic sense got lost when it came to films being judged beyond the MPAA’s provincial standards.

Why do so many Americans still heed our movie ratings system?

Why should or would a nation-wide standard reign when every region, and state in-general has and abides by its own sensibilities?

A “Happy, Happy” story of love from Norway?

Lust blinds.  Love confounds. “Happy, Happy” is the feature-length debut of Anne Sewitsky.  Each of us has faced the questions of whether someone is the one for us.  Sometimes the answer to that question is easy; it’d be great to know that life.  What happens when you have to face the fact that you chose the wrong partner and lover?

This not quite love story opens at the Uptown Theatre on October 7th.

“Happy, Happy,” a Norwegian film, confronts that question in sensitive and sloppy ways.  There are two very different couples, neither of which is happy.  One man is fleeing from the memories of his wife’s infidelity.  One woman isn’t sure why her man feels nothing for and in fact belittles her.  And why he’s fine with ignoring his reasons why.

A happy marriage – each to someone else. (Courtesy: Magnolia Pictures)

Love is often a compromise, but how much do you give or give up for happiness?  In this story of love, which might not be a love story, an educated couple Sivge (Henrik Rafaelsen) and Elisabeth (Maibrett Saerens) rents a house from and is greeted by a provincial and friendly couple, Eirik (Joachim Rafaelsen) and Kaja (Agnes Kittelsen). Elisabeth and Sivge are professionals, while Kaja and Eirik do…we don’t know what.  Each couple has a son.  Elisabeth and Sivge is adopted from Ethiopia.  Why they are in this story is a mystery – neither helps the story.  Mysteriously Kaja no longer interests Eirik.  Some months ago Elisabeth cheated on Sivge.

Kaja, made vulnerable by Eirik’s chronic disinterest in and belittling of her, finds a role model in Sivge and Elisabeth, and a distraction in Sivge.  He finds a refreshing and welcome warmth and sweetness in Kaja.  But Eirik faces a different, confusing problem: why’d he choose Kaja?  What does he want?

This is a competent film with problems, which make you scratch your head: there’s a bizarre, awkward subplot concentrating on Elisabeth and Sivge’s adopted Ethiopian son.  For an inexplicable reason, after having found a children’s book on slavery, Kaja and Eirik’s son decides to play “slave” games with the boy.  He somewhat playfully treats him as one.

How does love look when you want the other's partner? (Courtesy: Magnolia Picture)

These distractions work like a musical segment from a circa mid-20th-Century movie: a Negro band plays a song, which is irrelevant to the movie, and, which when played in the South, could be removed so that it wouldn’t offend that region’s sensibilities.

There’s a palate-cleansing devise bombs:  a choral group, which sings between acts.  While the songs suit the story sometimes, they don’t serve it.  The subplots don’t support or propel the main story – they give nothing to it.  If the director had omitted either of these problems, she could’ve also omitted at least 15-minutes from the film.

This is a competent film with a nice, quiet and smart story.  But doesn’t need to run for much longer than an hour.

Share

“El Bulli: Cooking in Progress” highlights a movement, but leaves all but foodies in the cold

When one restaurant, El Bulli, stands above all others with its adventurous and experimental food, and becomes world renowned, why not document its story?

“El Bulli: Cooking in Progress” is a pure documentary in a sense; that’s no praise.  While most documentaries are edited to create a story structure and reveal memorable characters, this film avoids that.

The opening shot seizes our attention: the chief chef, Ferran Adrià, is in the dark sucking on a piece of glow-in-the-dark fish on a stick.  That’s cool.  Sadly, it’s also the just about the best part of this documentary.  The film-maker, Gereon Wetzel, omits any sense of artistic direction, or style or purpose.  Maybe you should call it observational movie-making?  He seems to have left the cameras on-location and merely edited the project for time and comprehensibility.  Maybe this is one of those films where a critic outside of the film’s target audience, oughtn’t write about it?

Yep. Cooking in progress (Courtesy: creative commons/flickr)

In a conversation with a different documentary film-maker, Morgan Spurlock, he mentioned someone that Werner Herzog said, “every cut is a lie.”  Well, none of the cuts used here are made in the interests of a story.  It ignores elementary rules of storytelling, which every working film-maker knows and uses to win an audience.

This opens at the Film Society of Mpls/St. Paul on Sept. 23.  The film-making should not be the focus.  It should be Spanish molecular gastronomy, which can transform a diner’s experience, and lift their dining standards.

After Mr. Adrià, the trio of co-executive chefs, Oriol Castro, Eduard Xatruch and Mateu Casanas, are emphasized, but we only get shallow gists of any of them, who they are or why they do their work.

Divided roughly in two, the film shows the testing and experimentation process and then how the chef foursome, and the restaurant team make the successful experiments work for diners.  Their serving process must abide by military precision; their diners consume 30 courses within three hours.

Another obstacle for you: their work is not just technical, but highly technical.  Too much so for those who aren’t either intensely curious, or foodies, or cooks themselves.

The chefs’ challenges might lose most other viewers.  It’s a shame because in a “60-Minutes” segment, from April 2010, one of Adrià’s protégés, José Andrés, who, according to renowned food critics, Ruth Reichl, is the pioneer in America of Molecular gastronomy, shows how exciting molecular gastronomy is!

If food excites you, but on a more common level, I urge you to watch a different, equally esoteric, but amusing story: PBS’ documentary, “Kings of Pastry,” about ambitious, competitive French pastry chefs.  It’s a superior example of a culinary documentary.  It’s exciting: it delivers drama, suspense and personal stories.

“Amigo,” John Sayles latest, is among the least of his works

“Amigo” is a historical drama from John Sayles, who made the fantastic “Honey Dripper” and “Lone Star.”  It’s too bad this take on a 1900s episode in U.S. war and foreign policy is one of Sayles’ weaker pieces, falling well short of those prior titles.
Around 1900, and during the Philippine-American war, a Philippino baryo (or barrio, as spelled in the U.S.) chief Rafael Dacanay (Joel Torre), faces a dilemma after U.S. Army troops come and occupy his community: either support his community, and family and quash that armed presence or support those troops, while his people doubt his allegiance, in order to survive?

(courtesy: images.google.com)

“Amigo” is boring for the most part, and slow.  This film lacks that intangible and inexplicable “oomph,” which a potent, memorable movie needs. It comes off as a well-financed, but earnest high school or college production.  Some of the actors, while skilled and well known to indie movie houses, merely walk through this.
This movie opens at the Film Society of Mpls./St. Paul on Friday Sept. 16th.  They’ve booked better movies.  But John Sayles has also made ‘em.
You remember how often you say, “hey, I always love so-an-so’s movies?”  Just like your friend adore “everything” that Martin Scorsese, Michael Mann, or Spike Lee does, or which Oliver Stone used to do.  When you look closely, as extraordinary as their talent is, each of them has also put out a few clunkers.  Have you considered that, while you love three or four of their works, you only really love 1/3 or 1/2 of what they’ve put out?  This one shouldn’t make that list.

Share

“Higher Ground,” from Vera Farmiga, shows us a different, personal struggle toward Christ

Each of us searches for personal meaning in life, a purpose.  Some use a holy book in that search.  “Higher Ground” tells a story of a woman, Corinne’s, walk with her faith, from elementary age into middle age.  Hers is a stuck in coming-of-faith story.  When you finally feel a firm grip on how life works, your place in the world and how you’ll work that, that’s one definition of coming-of-age.  Coming-of-faith is when you feel that with your faith.  To be stuck in coming-of-faith is when you’ve not yet found a firm ground or steady conviction when it comes to your faith or god.

A young, critically thoughtful Corinne (Courtesy: Sony Classics)

This interesting, profound drama, adapted from the memoir, “This Dark World,” by Carolyn S. Briggs,  opens at the Edina Cinema on September 9th.

“Higher Ground” is a feature-length film, directed by and starring Vera Farmiga, about how a girl, raised in a verbally abusive household, sticks with a choice after having committed herself to a conviction, Christ, without being convicted. She’s hungry for a church to guide her; maybe jumping the gun will be the catalyst?

Corinne wants to write fiction and live immersed in a world of art and critical thought.  A man and a moment of sexual hunger overtake that: she clicks with Ethan (Joshua Leonard), a like-minded, sensitive musician, concedes her virginity, clings to and finally marries him, in time for her pregnancy to show.  He’s provincial, with a level of curiosity that leaves him content with family and without questions that challenge or test him.

Another sign and symbol of their disconnection: shortly after marrying, they commiserate about opportunities lost in having a child: he wants to perform with a band.  She, a resolute, practical dreamer admits that she’d love to write novels, but hasn’t the time.  And kisses her baby with adoration.

Ethan flails in one last gesture of rebellion.  He takes his band, and Corinne and their daughter on a music gig – ill-fated.  His band mates are sophomoric, and want neither Corinne nor a baby sharing the band bus.  Straining to be a diplomat, and good sport, she’s at her wit’s end.  Their daughter needs a play or nap space in this Animal House setting.  Ethan screams for her to use a cooler!  Soon after stowing the baby, Ethan is distracted and crashes their bus.  They all bolt from the bus, Ethan dragging Corinne along with him.  She alone remembers that their daughter’s in the cooler – on the bus!  Once safe, Ethan declares “God saved her.”  A hasty conclusion?

A happy young marriage? (Courtesy: Sony Classics)

Corinne poses questions, which no one around her is ready for, or leave them comfortable.  As her children grow, Corinne becomes increasingly chafed by her husband, Ethan, and the church’s disinterest in her questions and spurning of her obstinacy.  Neither of them considers pursuing an examined life, as Aristotle extolled, and which she wants.  This clashes with who she wants to be, but at the same time, she tries to focus on what God wants from her.  She still wonders: how to submit to God when vital, incisive questions nag her?

“Higher Ground” is a quiet, patient story about a girl-come-young-woman’s spiritual search and yearning.  It resembles a chronic, persistent chafe similar to many of those in Martin Scorsese’s stories.  “The Last Temptation of Christ” is the obvious one. There Jesus is offered the option to simply live a human, mortal life, with a family, instead of living with the sacrifice and selfless service.  Corrine has already sacrificed her idea of a happy life in order to appease her church.  And she’s losing herself.

At the end of a scene Ethan sees, written on the wall, how far she has drifted from him, and how impotent he is in the face of that.  He finally sees a chasm between them.  He just doesn’t get her.  While talking about their children, and a petty complaint about her, she runs to their station wagon and away from him.

A man, different from Ethan, makes her glow? (Courtesy: Sony Classics)

She’s fed up with him, or how far he has drifted from her.  She locks the driver’s side door. He takes the seat behind her, and tries to convince her to stay docile, to be Godly, but doesn’t know how to fight that without hitting her – he seizes her throat from behind, and squeezes, more to vent than to hurt her.  But that’s it!

She needs to try life independent of Ethan, and maybe find God again that way.

Later, after leaving Ethan, she has just testified to her church about not yet having found home within God, after more than 20 years.  The final shot is potent and subtle: Corrine looks back at the congregation with hope and uncertainty.

Religious movies can be difficult when they paint outside of the lines, whether those are bound by belief, outright doubt or vice.  The zealous Christian probably wants a movie that’ll affirm their convictions and submission to God’s will.  Those on the other, secular, side want something that’ll confirm theirs; they’re tired of hearing dramatic, dogma of their imminent damnation.

“Higher Ground” is a good film.  If you demand a fast-paced, metropolitan take on religious life, this might refresh you.  If you sympathize or are comfortable with tough questions left dangling for Corrine or with the way she pursues her faith, then this’ll suit you.  If not, still try it.  Thoughtful, even-handed stories about religious or spiritual life are rare.

“In My Sleep” should stay in bed

Markus seems to keep waking up “In My Sleep,” with nasty evidence of murder in or on his hands.  His boss’ & best friend’s, Justin (Tim Draxl), wife, Ann (Kelly Overton), disappears and is presumed murdered.  The more often Markus awakes with suspicious, even bloody evidence in-hand, the more he starts to pursue cures to his disorder, and answers for the blood.

Markus (Philip Winchester), is a day spa masseuse and a parasomniac.  That word pops up often in conversatory, doesn’t it?  According to WebMD “parasomnias are disruptive sleep-related disorders that can occur during arousals from REM sleep or partial arousals from Non-REM sleep.”  They “include nightmares, night terrors, sleepwalking, confusional arousals, and many others.”  While the movie makes the noctural murders the prevailing disorder, it isn’t.

The key question: did he kill Ann?  The plot twists, which they add atop story wrinkle atop peripheral character tell us that the filmmakers, Allen Wolf and David Austin, almost forget or ignore this question.  None of these serves the story.  Instead they add up to distracting and frustrating us.  There are worse movies out there, but it might be hard to name one that’s a mess on as many levels as this.

Caged "In My Sleep"

This film played at the Film Society of Minneapolis/St. Paul in mid-August.

“In My Sleep” is an ambitious, overwrought and overwritten attempt at a thriller.  How many ways can you describe a bad, or badly made movie?  It’s like a cook who’s found himself in a Master Chef-like competition while having no clue of how to not come off as a fool, hold his own or even win.

An example: Marcus at a nightclub, with Justin and Ann.  The night is young, so he elects to hop to the next nightspot and find a girl.  But he gets a female crank caller, whom he assumes, by reflex, must be one of his one-time conquests.  But she asks him, in a forthright, non-sentimental way, why he sleeps with a new woman every night; why he can’t commit to one?  Now, it’s weird and creepy.  And this pondering question could make for a decent story about some of life’s pillars, love, sex and happiness.

A second example: in a surprise birthday party sequence, Markus opens a package, a particularly combat-worthy knife, is taken aback and then reads the card – sent and written by himself.  Bizarre.  Pieces of story, like this, are introduced capriciously and then dropped.

Every 15-mins seems to add a twist wrinkle, character or symbolism.  There are at least three scenes, subplots or sequences, which if omitted, would clarify the plot: there is the police’s investigation of Ann’s death; the one about Markus’ parents’ dysfunctions; and one where his love interest turns out to be a relative out to avenge his friend’s death.  Each is instead barely developed, like a child who claims a passionate hobby for about a week, before dropping it.  None of these serves the story.

“In My Sleep” trying too hard to be a gripping Hitchcockian thriller.  It’s desperate, adding new twists and absurd, potential subplots and character motivations.  It’s trying to cover for being inept.

Gift to self: a knife for killing

“Sleep” is incoherent and barely organized: it reminds me of HBO’s 2000 “Longitude,” story about the creation of Standard Time.  It’s splendid with fascinating characters.  The clock’s namesake, John Harrison, was so much of egoist that he didn’t strip away design errors; instead he added pieces to the clock, on top of the errors, to make it work.  According to the HBO film, the Harrison Machines, while working, also boast a mess of pointless, add-on parts.  The design was crude, but worked, and helped to save lives – but that’s a whole other story.  Too bad the “In My Sleep” flat out doesn’t work.

The filmmakers steal from Alfred Hitchcock, to whom a New York Times critic has compared “In My Sleep”, and John Dahl and other filmmakers.  Each of them deftly spins yarns of suspense, albeit in different and distinctive ways.

Compare this film to Mr. Dahl’s 1989′s “Kill Me Again,” 1994′s “The Last Seduction” or 1996′s “Unforgettable,” or to any one of Mr. Hitchcock’s oeuvres.  Do you need a list?  At least three must be on the tip of your tongue.  When Messrs Dahl or Hitchcock each uses suspense, it pays off, excites us and serves the story.  When Mr. Wolf does it we get the opposite.  At least half the time when Wolf tries the climactic reveal, which the music plays up, it collapses.  That broaches the other fundamental crisis: mocking or copying Bernard Hermann.

The musical score, which copies those of Bernard Hermann, who did many of Hitchcock’s, tweaks the strings with such exuberance as to mock Mr. Hermann’s remarkable, indelible music.  It’s disappointing.  It’s makes you shake your head, asking “why screw up that iconic musical touch?”

“In My Sleep” offers a promising plot in the first act.  But maybe it’s only enough to give it enough rope to hang itself.  Not everything in this is bad or badly done, but most of it is, and that drowns out what could have been a competent genre yarn.

Unfortunately the film team, Allen Wolf, and producer, David Austin, try too hard without having the competence or skills to accomplish their vision.  But this story shows meager evidence that they held a clear, cogent one.

But at some point you have to blurt “enough.”  The Razzies might find time to celebrate this one. It’s too bad, even morose; you want to give an artist some credit for daring or reaching.  Competence is the first question.

“Passione” for John Turturro’s documentary take on Neapolitan music

“Passione” is musical, but it’s not a musical.  This is an independent project of love for actor John Turturro.  Most documentaries share a trait: an agenda, mission, personal or political story.  They employ a narrative structure; not “Passione.”  It’s a movie but has neither a plot, nor a story, nor stars.

It opens at Minneapolis’ Lagoon Cinema on August 19th.

Sparring over love

A series of music videos, with interview sound bites cut in, most of “Passione” has groups or soloists performing in-place.  It documents Naples’ musical passion.  It emphasizes the performances over any expert’s historical points-of-view.

With neither a plot nor an obvious story to recount “Passione” is a series of music videos Napoli-style.  Maybe Italy’s MTV still bothers with its namesake programming unlike in America.

This’s John Turturro’s love letter to Naples, he says, and its music.  Maybe it’s like 1977′s “New York, New York” was for Martin Scorsese, as he has described it in interviews.

A couple of scenes stand out: one, early on, has several women writhe and gyrate on a multilevel building – a striking site – for what seems to be one of the few songs, without an on-screen singer.  Another one, half way into the film, has a trio of disparate sounding vocalists, including Peppe Barra and M’Barka Ben Taleb, take on “Lay that Pistol Down.”  It’s remarkable.  An engaging dissonance, which jars as much as it charms.

If “Lay that Pistol Down” is new to your ears, you might have to be patient, approaching it with an open, sonic palate or just await its finish.  It’s a vocal assault, which is none-the-less compelling if you can go beyond how foreign it might be to your ears.

Ms. Taleb alternates between singing and doing a tribal-sounding shout, the name for which escapes me!  Mr. Barra alternates between singing and rapping, aggressively.  A third vocalist, whose presence Barra and Taleb overshadow, completes a noteworthy trio.

If you like Neapolitan music, or even Italian style or architecture, this might suit you.

Share

“Crime After Crime” is a moving documentary about a woman’s perseverence, and the sausage-making in “justice”

“Crime After Crime,” a feature-length documentary by Yoav Potash, about a troubled young woman, Deborah Peagler, who was convicted of homicide more than 25 years ago.  This, after having asked neighborhood gangsters to make her abusive lover stop beating and terrorizing her.  While a 2003 California law would only demand six years of her life in prison, her 1983 sentence took more than 25.  This is her story.

This suspenseful true story will show at the Film Society of Minneapolis/St. Paul starting on July 29th.

Ms. Deborah Peagler awaits justice and freedom (courtesy Sundance)

Two lawyers, Nadia Costa and Joshua Safran, stepped up to take her case, pro bono, after a 2003 California law was passed that changed the game for victim/survivors of domestic abuse who are convicted of homicide, and free her.  In doing so they found a sympathetic client, and a District Attorney’s office, run by Steve Cooley, that has committed and is committing “Crime After Crime,” as Mr. Safran described their conduct, to save face and keep careers.

When you picture justice, this isn’t it: not “Crime After Crime.”  It’s a spectacular story, where the themes and stakes will remind some of you of the activist 1970s movie trend with such titles as 1980′s “Brubaker,” 1979′s “…And Justice for All,” and 1975′s “Dog Day Afternoon,” of the underdog.

Winston Churchill, an extraordinary political icon of the United Kingdom, once said that “Democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms…”  As it goes with that, so this seems to with justice: she was denied parole at least thrice.  At one point Safran describes how the parole and appellate process work in ways, which ignore or preclude the convict’s promise for doing good.  Ms. Deagler had been an ideal inmate, had earned a two-year degree, become a mentor to junior inmates and served far more time than 2000s laws demanded.  So the case requires Herculean efforts even when the law, precedent and rhetorical are on their side.

Lawyers Josh Safran and Nadia Costa guide Ms. Peagler toward freedom, if not justice (courtesy Berkeley Side)

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office does so many things that clash with the public’s interests or Ms. Peagler’s.  It makes you wretch and doubt America’s commitment to justice, or equal justice.  Originally she was sentenced via a legal perspective that lumped women, who lash out is desperation at their abusive husbands or lovers, with those women who kill in cold blood.

The stakes, offenses and perversions of justice, and morals in this story make it a crackerjack whodunit.  What makes the hairs on the back of your neck stand is that “Crime After Crime” trains its crosshairs, more and more, on the prosecutors misconduct.  The DA’s office conceals a pivotal document, uses unreliable and impotent witness testimony and reneges on compassionate agreements.

California's masses support Peagler's cause (courtesy LATimes.com)

“Crime After Crime” boasts as many plot twists and is as fast-paced as a sweeps week episode of “Law & Order.”  In some ways this is similar to 1993′s “In the Name of the Father,” even though that drama, which was based on a true story, exonerates justice in the United Kingdom.  In both stories, convicts languish in prison for crimes, and with sentences, more heinous than the evidence warranted.

Ms, Peagler’s odyssey is even more trying and dramatic than another documentary, POV’s “Presumed Guilty,” from 2010.  That  indicts the Mexican version of justice – and a very non-Western.  That candid and uncomfortable exposé provides excellent and telling comparison to Ms. Peager’s story.

Alongside being a splendid true crime drama, this documentary pushes us to consider several uncomfortable questions: what is justice?  what color is it?  why must it not only have a price, but one that makes our noses bleed?  Finally, what do we expect from it vs. what America’s founders wanted us to expect from it.

Share

Share

Blog at WordPress.com.
Theme: Esquire by Matthew Buchanan.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.