Review: West of Memphis
A re-telling of the trial of the ‘West Memphis 3’; Damien Echols, Jason
Baldwin, and intellectually impaired Jesse Misskelley, charged with the murders
of three young boys in Arkansas in 1993. The locals wanted blood, and these
Metallica-loving defendants, especially Wicca enthusiast Echols, seemed like
good enough culprits and were relatively quickly convicted with the belief that
they were Devil-worshipping Satanists who killed the boys in some kind of
penis-eating ritual. Yes, this really happened (this is in the Bible-belt of
America, remember), and Echols was even given a death sentence. The “Paradise
Lost” trilogy of documentaries detailed the trial and convictions, and
argued that these three young men were railroaded (Misskelley’s ‘confession’
was embarrassingly inept and clearly led by the cops looking for an open and
shut case) and pointed to other suspects.
This film details efforts made by New Zealand filmmaker Peter Jackson and
wife/co-producer Fran Walsh, in conjunction with Eccols’ dedicated wife Lorri
Davis to keep the investigation going and see the ‘West Memphis 3’ released. It
goes even further than “Paradise Lost 3: Revelations” in pointer the
finger of guilt towards Terry Hobbs, stepfather of one of the deceased boys.
Meanwhile, celebrities such as Johnny Depp, Eddie Vedder, and Henry Rollins
also take up the cause.
Although the story continued after the events shown in “Paradise Lost
3: Revelations”, I have to say that I wasn’t of the belief that we needed
another film on the ‘West Memphis 3”. Having seen this 2012 documentary from
director Amy Berg, I still don’t think it was necessary, though the final twenty
minutes or so is at least relatively fresh and interesting. It’s also a more
well-made and concise film than at least the first two “Paradise Lost”
films, to be honest (“Revelations” is still the best, partly because the
second one seems negated by it anyway, and hindsight means that “West of
Memphis” is able to trim much of the fat and dead-ends).
However, there was just something that bugged me about it throughout. How
come I hadn’t heard about the supposedly close involvement of NZ filmmaker
Peter Jackson and his partner before? Or celebrities like Johnny Depp, Eddie
Vedder, and Henry Rollins? Were all of these people (and Berg for that matter)
trying to latch themselves onto the West Memphis 3 case and therefore trying to
negate the importance of the three previous films by Joe Berlinger and Bruce
Sinofsky? Or is it possibly the other way around? Or am I just reading too much
into things? I have to admit that Jackson’s controversial faux-documentary “Forgotten
Silver” did creep into my mind at points, and probably should not have. It
just seemed odd that the “Paradise Lost” films made absolutely no
mention that I can recall of Jackson and this film only really pays lip service
to the “Paradise Lost” films, even though surely Jackson’s efforts
would’ve been concurrent to at least the second or third of the films, right?
Well, after seeing “West of Memphis” I have now read Joe Berlinger
saying complimentary things about Jackson (though there was a little friction
here and there), and mentioning that during “Paradise Lost 3”, Jackson
asked to be left out of it and remain anonymous. Well, there you go. Nothing
suspicious at all, but if you’ve seen “Forgotten Silver”, you’ll forgive
my suspicions I hope (I still find scenes with Terry Hobbs’ daughter supposedly
undergoing therapy to look awfully staged).
At any rate, it’s still an interesting, if somewhat redundant film, and
the story is certainly an important indictment of Hicksville hysteria. Sure,
there are some who still insist the West Memphis 3 are guilty as sin, but for
me personally, I think of all the potential suspects, they are at the very
least the most unlikely to be guilty,
and this film more than ever makes it seem like Terry Hobbs is the numero uno
suspect (the film even brings up his supposed history of abuse, some of which
he is seen on camera admitting to, but also accusations by some of Hobbs’
family and neighbours). We get a particularly disturbing appearance by Hobbs’
supposed alibi for the night, David Jacoby (whose DNA, like Hobbs’, was found
at the scene), who appears to be having a nervous breakdown on camera. Just
sayin’. Hell, with the revelation of a supposed ‘Hobbs family secret’, it
almost approaches Milat Family proportions of conspiracy. However, we’ll likely
never know because the Alford plea verdict means that the case is closed, from
an Arkansas point of view.
Getting back to the West Memphis 3, I must say that I was especially
moved by the final scene involving Jason Baldwin, seemingly the most relatable,
quiet-natured of the three (then) boys, as he has his first taste of freedom.
Misskelley’s family reunion also brings home the years the trio have missed out
on. I must confess, I even shed a tear.
So while a lot of this film may be redundant, and while I don’t really
care that Natalie Maines and Johnny Depp wanted the West Memphis 3 freed, this
is still a very interesting and quite sad film. It’s also kind of creepy, given
that the real killer/killers are likely still out there.
Rating: B-
Comments
Post a Comment