Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

Plustown A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

DBLurker First of all, I felt really sorry for John Mark Byers. He lost his child, then his wife, then all the health issues. But he still kept fighting. Despite his theatrics, I really felt sad for him because he reminded me of how hysterical my own father was on death of my mother last year.That said, I saw these movies without know anything about these murders or the fact that the three convicted were released later on. So, believe me when I say that Terry Hobbs from the moment I saw him in first movie, acted shady as f**k. He showed no remorse at all, not even enough to hold his wife or console her properly when she was crying. His behavior kept bothering me and lo and behold, the third movie finally shows us why. He's nothing but a psychopath.But the worst part is, he'll go scott free. Because of the incompetence of the cops who couldn't be arsed with doing their jobs properly.

p-stepien The (temporary) grand finale to one of the cases of the last few decades. Recapping the story about the West Memphis Three: Damien Wayne Echols, Jessie Misskelley and Jason Baldwin, a trio of outcast youth convicted for the murder of three school-kids in the woods near Memphis. Back in 1993 a wild witch (or more truthfully satanist) hunt was initiated, pinning the whole gruesome murders onto dark-clad heavy-rock listening youth with a individualist spirit. Echols was deemed the ring-leader, Baldwin was made guilty by association, while Misskelley was the victim of police coercion and forced testimony. Together all suspects were sentenced with Echols being gifted a death verdict.Throughout the years "Paradise Lost" has served as a saving grace for the three young boys, most likely wrongly convicted of any crime - almost all family members of the victims agree to this point of view. Eleven years after the second part was filmed this could well be the last part in this conviction of a corrupt legal system, who sentenced kids to hefty punishments based on prejudice and hearsay. To the most part "Paradise Lost 3" serves well as a source of information regarding the whole sequence of events, strongly insinuating the innocence of the accused. Largely relying on traditional storytelling methods the documentary basically hits home its message, without really exerting too much emotional involvement - a stark contrast to the previous parts.The weakest link here seems however the need to focus on answering the question: If the West Memphis Three were innocent, than who committed these heinous acts? Much to the detriment to the overall trilogy. Many years ago part 2 strongly implicated John Mark Byers, the father of one of the victims as the murderer, most likely wrongfully so based on flimsy evidence and misconceptions. Despite not learning from that failure in connect the dots, "Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory" goes even further in its damnation of Terry Hobbs, stepfather of another boy, as the most likely suspect. Even though the evidence is purely circumstantial several of the people involved in the movie pinpoint the man as the perpetrator, dedicated a misguided prolonged segment to his person. Whether or not Hobbs is guilty remains a mystery best solved by forensic scientists and in court, not by documentary filmmakers, who have basically replicated the same sin committed by the courts, that sentenced the teenage threesome: implication based on prejudice and half-truths or unknowns. This runtime would have probably best serve to highlight how the freed men, after 18 years of incarceration, are now coping with integrating back into society - half a life wasted due to judicial incompetence. A definite red light in my book, hence a significantly lowered rating.Nonetheless "Paradise Lost" serves it purpose as a key instrument of changing public perceptions on the death penalty and the frailties of police and justice systems, making a strong case for reasonable doubt in their objective functionality.

ruthieshatz I thought the first two films were powerful, reviling and mind provoking. After the first few minutes of the third film where it already started with the encore statement about the film's influence (self indulgent by the filmmakers: already a turn-off) then to my amazement there were shots of the 3 boys bodies! (a site I will have to go through therapy to forget...) I simply couldn't believe how obnoxious, tasteful and abusive it was. What is it with you filmmakers? you didn't think you have a strong enough story or a powerful tool in your hand, that you turn to pornography? Really offensive. No respect what's or ever to the families or to other human-beings. extremely disappointing. I think what actually happen was, that the filmmakers had become so influenced by the the decadent scenery of the film that they forgot that other human beings aren't as numbed as those who put Damien and his friends behind bars.

R F Brown It's been 16 years and two sequels since I saw the first Paradise Lost documentary at the Film Forum in New York City. I'm glad the wrongfully accused are set free but I still feel the truth rots a in dark, incarcerated place. I remember that the first documentary, a compelling story of wrong compounded by wrong, was also a frustratingly unthorough piece of journalism. The synopsis is that in 1993 three eight year old boys were murdered and thrown in a ditch in West Memphis, Arkansas. Three teenage boys, to be nicknamed the West Memphis 3, were convicted of the murders under highly questionable investigatory and judicial procedures. The first film fell well short for me in providing a sufficient account of the prosecution's so called case. A year after seeing the first PL the friend I went to see it with called me up and said, "I heard those documentary guys made it all up to make the teenagers look good. When you hear the whole story they are totally guilty." Really? What's your source? None, really. Is there a whole story? I have always been convinced that the teenagers were railroaded. But after years of sequels, cult-like public outrage, websites, Eddie Vedder and Johnny Depp I still have no idea what happened back in 1993. If the WM3 were not murdering cub scouts that night in 1993, where were they? None of these films have ever discussed an alibi. If a documentary is presenting itself as the balanced account of its subject matter and one side of the argument is being left out, there must be a reason. I can't speculate the reason because facts in this case have always been overshadowed by emotions, self-righteousness on behalf of the WM3 supporters, stubborn obfuscation by law enforcement, and repeated attempts by the filmmakers to offer alternative accusations that frankly are as shoddy and irresponsible as the lousy case against the teenagers. There is another feature documentary ,West Of Memphis, in circulation as well as many TV magazine pieces which may provide more information. I'd like to know if there is more to know about what happened the night those young boys were murdered, and I'd like to know more about what the police actually had on the WM3. In Purgatory the defense has gone to all the trouble of pulling together world renown criminal profilers and DNA experts. Yet the new documentary doesn't reveal one thing we didn't already know. These films succeeded in calling attention to injustice perpetrated on the accused and the fact that the real killer will never be brought to justice. The Arkansas court system created an outcome in which the case will never be reopened. The whole story is fascinating and sad, but these movies aren't very good either.