Why? It's not terrible...just why? The 'Paradise Lost' trilogy is a masterpiece. 'West of Memphis' was a serviceable tell all. Now suddenly a director capable of better tells an abbreviated version designed as a star vehicle for Firth and Witherspoon. Why? A miscalculation on most every level save a moving school room scene. One has a feeling of a 70's TV movie with 'A" production values.
*1/2. Reese Witherspoon's worst performance to date. It's clearly a producer movie and I hope that Atom Egoyan accepted the job only because he had tax arrears to pay. Now as the accusers are as pitiful as the accused according to the director, I really don't have an opinion about this case. Already forgotten.
Some casting choices are on the point like Kevin Durand, others are very difficult to overcome. The leading lady Reese seems to have made no study on the character - except maybe for the tv interview. Not a great movie but not a terrible one either.
West Memphis Three : 3 ados condamnés en 1994 pour les meurtres en 1993 de 3 enfants de 8 ans. Damien Echols à la peine de mort, Jessie Misskelley & Jason Baldwin à perpétuité, lors d'un procès pour rituel satanique. Libérés 18 ans après, lors d'une révision à l'américaine, leur innocence fut reconnue alors que paradoxalement les poursuivants détenaient suffisamment de preuves pour les faire condamner.
Just watch Paradise Lost. I really wanted to like this but it fell so far short of anything insightful that I honestly hated it. It offered no new information as to the West Memphis Three case, in fact some of the story was misleading. I don't understand why this was made, and made so poorly.
I get the feeling that none of the cast and crew know what this is supposed to be. Almost everything is awful, from screenplay to performances, especially Witherspoon's. Kudos only to Hamrick and Dehaan. Poor representation of a very complex murder case.