Reviews (13)

A classic documentary
This superb documentary, despite being criticized for its use of fictitious re-creation scenes, provides convincing proof that a Dallas man was wrongly accused of killing a police officer. The accused man, who had been put on death row for 12 years, was eventually freed because of this film. Comprised mainly of interviews of the people involved in the murder case (including, chillingly, the person believed to be the real killer), the film paints a frightening picture of our justice system gone haywire. The dramatic re-creations, complete with film-noir like camera work and music score, to some violate the rules in documentary films, which traditionally contain only 100% documentary footage. Director Errol Morris' response to the criticism was that, "the re-creations are not supposed to depict the truths, but the LIES people have told. I believe David Harris shot the policeman, but the re-creations NEVER show that."

A bit of injustice was served to this film as well, as it was not nominated for a best-documentary oscar.

One of the damnedest documentaries I have ever seen.
I am a movie buff from Widener University, who bought this documentary on VHS as an afterthought while buying two other critically acclaimed docs, Streetwise and Gates of Heaven (both given 4 stars by Roger Ebert, who's like a second father to me). Although some people might not like the fact that this VHS version was pan-and-scan, the visual impact of the filmed interviews as well as the soundtrack still shines through. Anyone who wonders why so many people oppose the death penalty should see this film. People who have served jury duty (or are considering it) will also benefit. The Thin Blue Line not only shows how justice can miscarry all too easily, it makes its viewers get to know the interviewees all too well. Errol Morris's reconstructions of the different versions of Officer Wood's murder show up the inconsistencies of the witnesses' testimony so strongly that the real murderer, David Harris (who was only sixteen when he shot Wood)confessed to the crime. Of course by then Harris had nothing further to lose; he was already on Death Row for a subsequent murder. I would be surprised if Roger Ebert didn't raise his rating for this doc from 3 1/2 stars to four and include it in his list of "The Great Movies."

Solid Filmmaking.
Errol Morris is one of the few filmmakers who allows real people to speak their voices. One can tell when seeing his documentaries that the people speaking are talking from their hearts and minds, and not reading a screenplay or Q-card. In his movies, one can sense a level of rawness not found from other filmmakers. In 'The Thin Blue Line', Morris tries to aquit an innocent man of murdering a police officer.
The story is told in a breath-taking fashion, with Morris going back to the scene of the crime and telling it from as many viewpoints as possible. When doing this, he also exposes the manipulative nature of people, showing how they will go to great lenghts to save themselves and make a quick dollar. The subject matter might bore some people after a while, but the last interview with the real killler at the end of the film is simply haunting and unforgettable.

Amazing
I watched this film in my film and Lit class, then over the weekend I rented it and watched it several more times, it is truely astounding, as a native Texan I have always mindlessly supported the death penalty, but this movie gave me my doubts.

PS. David Harris is still on Death Row and is scheduled to be executed on 6/30/2004, crazy he's now 44

Not impossible
Another reviewer claims that it is impossible to see this film and still support the death penalty. I guess I am refuting that "impossibility" to a possibility. I wholeheartedly support the death penalty AND this is my favorite documentary of all time. Yes, this film clearly shows through interviews (new testimonials?), visuals, re-enactments, and other evidence that the innocent CAN go to jail and even death row. It is a sad justice system, but it still doesn't dissuade me from the death penalty to those that are guilty and deservant of their crime.

Now this film just needs to be re-released on DVD with an addendum to let know viewers know that Mr. Adams was exonerated. Most people may know already, but some viewers will watch this without knowing the case and the repercussion that this film has caused. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

do not buy it.... take my word for it.
stupid, boring, irrelevent,changes subject every 2 mins,
belive me because i love history and documentarys but hated this one

It May 'Blow Your Mind' (no pun intended)
The Iran-Contra scandal, as this video illustrates in the beginning, is probably one of the most ignored events of the 1980s. The film takes an obvious 'conspiracy theory' approach, which, although sometimes entertaining, sometime relies too much on 'documents' and 'information' that aren't actually seen. However, the video does create a very valid view on US policy in Latin America, and the possible role of the CIA in covert operations that may not be in America's best interest (at least in the wake of recent events). There's a link, at least in the video's mind, between a 'shadow' government that might potentially suspend civil rights when dealing with criticism (something we have dealt with recently, in terms of war protestors), and what happened to Japanese-Americans during WWII. Narrated by Elizabeth Montgomery, this video brings a definite POV of not only Iran-Contra, but of US foreign policy. It is a video that will definitely spark conversation...which is good, even if you don't agree with all the conclusions presented.

no wonder George W. Bush doesn't want documents released!
If George W. Bush were to let presidential documents to be released, it would mean the certain end of the Republican Party in the United States. And this video reveals why. There were lots of under-handed deals going on even before Ronald Reagan entered the White House followed by many overt and covert operations instigated and approved by the United States government. The release of information revealing what was really going on during the Reagan administration would cause irreparable damage to George W.'s current cohorts such as Elliot Abrams and John Poindexter, perhaps even to the administration itself.

The only criticism I have is that this video seemed to go on a lot of tangents which were not completely relevant to the Iran-Contra scandal per se, such as the graphic scenes of the bombing of La Penca or linking Oliver North to the training of the Contras. However, this could be forgiven because information released by the various agencies was meager and they covered what was available.

The REX-84 plan has a remarkable resemblance to the current round-up of so-called unlawful combatants. The video revealed that REX-84 was a plan to detain aliens from Latin American countries in camps in case of a serious federal emergency or break-down of the government. The sole deviation from the plan seems to be that it is people of Middle Eastern descent rather than people from Latin America who are being detained.

I would recommend this video as a gift to anyone enamored with Ronald Reagan or the Reagan administration. They may change their minds.

Terrible, Shocking Truths
Born in 1978, I was awfully young to know what was going on during the Iran-Contra scandals. I vividly remember a vacation at my grandparents' house where we watched hours and hours of Oliver North testifying before Congress, but I had no idea what it was all about. He seemed like a nice guy to me, but my parents didn't have anything nice to say about him. What I did know was that what my parents said about North, Ronald Reagan, and George Bush was not be repeated in mixed company.

This user-friendly 1988 film documents the many atrocities the United States spearheaded during the Reagan-Bush years (as well as some of those in the years prior). The information is disgusting. It is angering. And unfortunately, it seems to be the truth. The CIA were involved in cocaine and arms trafficking. Reagan made a deal to delay the release of hostages in Iran until he took office. The CIA had plans to round up political dissidents and hold them in detainment camps. Etc., etc., etc.

This kind of material always runs the risk of being dismissed as leftist propaganda and paranoia - especially when, as is the case here, the allegations are so extreme as to seem implausible. "Coverup," however, nicely maintains superb objectivity. First, none of what we learn is told to us by the narrator, but instead by a variety of interviewed authorities. Second, those authorities aren't obscure political analysts, cynical history professors, renegade journalists, and conspiracy theorists, but actually United States Congressmen (both Dem. and Rep.!), Reagan-Bush campaign managers, formerly high-ranking CIA operatives, New York Times editors, etc. Third, archived news footage is used to let the likes of Reagan and North incriminate themselves. Rather than rely on speculation, "Coverup" lays down facts.

This documentary is a great and easy way to bone up on some of the recent horrors of recent American history, which is great for someone like me who simply doesn't know much. It seems particularly worth watching now that baby Bush is bringing the legacy into the 21st Century. (But do beware of some awful bad 80s hair.)

The Video Republicans Want Banned
To understand what the Republican Party stands for, watch this terribly disturbing documentary. It is very pertinent today, in relation to the GW Bush/Enron scandal. ... Read more

Amazon.com

What happened at the Branch Davidian compound in Mt. Carmel, Texas, in 1993?Why did 4 federal agents and 86 civilians lose their lives?The powerful documentary Waco: The Rules of Engagement asks these and many other difficult questions, and the answers are deeply disturbing, even for the most cynical. Using interviews, news footage, testimony before Congress, and infrared photographic analysis, the film relentlessly chips away at the government's story that David Koresh and his followers were a dangerous cult involved in strange sex and drug practices who were preparing to slaughter their neighbors and that they immolated themselves à la Jonestown, rather than give themselves up peacefully.Nearly every element of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms' and the FBI's cover-up is exposed as fraudulent and the viewer is left wondering when, if ever, justice will finally be served.Warning: There are a few minutes of extremely graphic footage of the burnt bodies of the Davidians; though this is sickening, it seems less so than the tragic mistakes made by law enforcement officials. --Rob Lightner ... Read more

Reviews (93)

Watch It Critically...But Watch It
This is a shocking and disturbing movie. Watching it, you get the sense that the ATF and FBI missed no opportunity to screw up at Waco, and to lie about it afterwards. Neither did the politicians who investigated it. Did they? I'll have to learn more about it before I decide.

Since I don't really know any details about Waco that were not presented in this movie, it's impossible for me to judge it in terms of its accuracy. It is possible that the filmmakers chose the most damning footage from the Senate hearings, and various Waco "experts." Chuck Schumer, John Conyers, Shiela Jackson, Joseph Biden...they come off sounding like apologists for what (if this movie is correct) is the worst slaughter of American citizens by its government since Wounded Knee. Now, knowing Schumer, and his smarmy, arrogant, ideological self-righteousness, and Conyers' mindless gun-hating knee-jerk liberalism, and Janet Reno's, well, daffiness, this wouldn't necessarily be hard to believe.

But still, it is...I mean, the evidence in this movie seems SO compelling, and so heart-wrenching, that Schumer and company would have to be barbarians not to want to hold the responsible parties accountable. Were Democrats merely trying to insulate the Clinton administration from blame? It seems to stretch plausibilty that even the likes of Schumer would try to excuse mass murder. Who knows. Not I.

Some compelling facts surface in this movie. Remarkably, the ATF refused an invitation from Koresh to inspect his licensed weaponry. Instead, for some reason, they chose to serve him with a search warrant by showing up with truckloads of heavily-armed agents, helicopters, and so forth. It remains unclear who fired first. The Davidians insist the ATF did. The ATF insists the Davidians did. While it's possible the filmmakers were biased, there do seem to be some pretty irrefutable facts suggesting the government lied...and lied wildly. In fact, at one point we hear a negotiator lying to Koresh, over and over, about the presence of gun on one of the helicopters that fired on Davidians. The negotiator insists that there were no guns on the helicopter, and Koresh keeps telling him he saw them firing on him and the others. Finally the negotiator admits that the agents on the helicopter were armed, but there were no MOUNTED guns on the helicopter...like that makes all the difference. Also, infrared film seems to show FBI agents firing into a burning building as they back away, and as Davidians burn to death inside that building...yet they claim they never fired a single shot.

Local law enforcement spoke highly of Koresh. He certainly doesn't seem to be the child-molesting, whacked-out, violent drug dealing crminial that the government made him out to be in order to head off criticism for their attack. He and the rest of the Davidians are odd, yes, but the Davidians that the filmmakers present are not the brainwashed cult members they've been made out to be. Does being odd, and owning a lot of guns warrant having the ATF stomp all over you? Are we not supposed to, uh, celebrate diversity?

The movie implies--or interviews people who imply--that there was a government conspiracy to murder the Davidians. I remain unconvinced. The massacre at Waco seems like a series of mistakes (understandable in tense, dangerous situations, if not excuseable), and cover-ups.

This movie is a must-see. Watch it critically...but watch it.

Should be required viewing
Waco: The Rules of Engagement should be required viewing by all seniors in every public high school in the land.

This documentary may be the single most shocking evidence of the actual impact of a rougue government, bent on murdering it's own citizens. Using an impressive combination of video from the Waco site, congressional hearings, night vision, news camera film clips and actual testimony, this video leaves no doubt that the U.S. Government, under Janet Reno and William Jefferson Clinton murdered innocent civilians. One of the hidden stars in this movie is the arrogant, obnoxious, and totally disrepectful Charles Schummer, then a congressman. Of special interest is the infra-red film of the night sieges by the BATF and FBI where any compound resident attempting to stray outside of the buildings is summarily executed by agents equipped with night vision. The IR film conclusively shows this outright murder while the agents are shown recounting one falsehood after another. Lying, subterfuge, confusion, murder, violence against innocent citizens, all condoned by the Attorney General of the United States. It almost sounds like a made for TV movie that is too far-fetched to be true. Sadly, it is all documented, believable, and excessively frightening.

Very Disturbing, Things Haven't Changed Much
As with many reviewers, I sat down to watch this movie having been exposed to the mainstream media spin. However, after listening to blatant government lies (i.e. "I repeat, the FBI didn't shoot at anyone"), which were contradicted by FLIR footage, and after hearing about crucial evidence that conveniently vanished; I no longer view our federal government with the same sense of trust that I once did.

As one Delta Commando aptly pointed out, the ATF was so poorly prepared that they didn't even have a medical backup waiting in case anything went wrong (the news people had to call for help!). As a retired NYC police officer, I can tell you that this is the signature of absolute and utter incompetence. The people in charge obviously didn't know what they were doing and I wouldn't be surprised if the Feds actually did start the gun battle. They were probably a bunch of tobacco-chewing good-old-boys and yahoos who thought they could get away with shooting first and asking questions later. Perhaps this is how they do it in Texas; it sure is hell isn't how I did it in Brooklyn.

Finally, there was no need to bring out tanks and gas. Anyone who's studied the history of seige warfare knows that it's often easier simply to wait out your adversary. Most of the large-scale seiges that were won in the middle ages were done in this manner. Let them run out of food and supplies and then allow them to surrender (or starve if they would rather). This option is far less destructive and could have saved lives on both sides.

Oh no, the ATF and the FBI couldn't take this route. They had something to prove to the world. Defying the federal government is a capital offense, and anyone who defends themselves in their own homes after being fired upon should be made an example.

The evidence, in short, is damning. Having lived, and worked, through the 60s; I would have guessed that this type of shoddy cover-up went out of style when nut-jobs like J. Edgar Hoover died. I guess not.

People might think that something like Tiananmen Square would never happen here. The passage of the Patriot Act will probably herald more Wacos.

The Government is not necessarily your friend.

I Was 100% Wrong In 1993
The ATF agents in Waco that day acted like the stumbling bumbling keystone cops.I had no idea how horrible our government had acted that day thanks to the cover up by the media.This movie shows without a shadow of a doubt that the government killed these people and then lied to cover it up.Chuck Schumer should be ashamed of himself for his part in squashing the congressional investigation.Schumer and his fellow congreeman saw even better and more clear evidence then this movie and came to the conclusion that nothing wrong happened.Watch the movie and then decide how honest he was about what happened.

FBI revenge killing
A friend of mine worked for Austin police departement once.
He told me that highway patrol people have one unwritten rule:
"if you kill a trooper you are basically dead - you may try to
surrender and walk out with your hands up they will still shoot
you and then testify you resisted arrest". Same was true about
Waco. The minute they killed first ATF agent they were as good
as dead. The DVD does marvelous job documenting coverup on the
part of FBI and the government. It should be required material
in every US high school. ... Read more

Description

Was there a takeover of the United States by international bankers? In this program you will visit the scene of a crime so perfect that, for thirty years, no one knew it had even taken place.

Join us as we investigate the birth of a criminal conspiracy to rob each and every bank vault in America, all at the same time. This is the true, behind the scenes, story of the birth of the United States Federal Reserve. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Excellent Video-Order this video
This is a must watch video on anyone wanting to learn more about the corruption of the Federal Reserve System. Hosted by Dean Stockwell, he blows the lid off the banking cartel.

You will be able to put two and two together and you will see how american are in slavery of the worst kind. It does not matter what your race his, the banking cartel does not care who they have to hurt to reach there objective.

The average person does not know about this banking cartel because they have a lot of money to influence, politicians, judges, presidents, churches, schools, cable network, radio networks, boyscouts, girlscouts, you name, any orginization that has influence and may teach the public.

Considering the fact the the banking cartel has a lot of money to buy up anyone they want when they create money out of nothing and charge interest on it.

The Solution:
The solution is to stop having these babies come into the system by the use of the Social Security Number.

Next we need education, the word must get out about the corruption.

We need a reform, the system cannot remain like it is without total destruction.

Next we need a revolution, a march of all the people with one common goal and that goal is to slay the beast. Time is running out people and its up to us to make a change. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Billed first as the lurid downfall of a president and then as the overreaching of a politically motivated prosecutor, this unprecedented look into heretofore sacrosanct federal grand jury proceedings and the precursor to Congressional impeachment hearings is fascinating on many levels both prurient and historical. The four-hour exchange between the first president ever to appear before a sitting grand jury is at times riveting and infuriating, as President Clinton seeks to split legal hairs over the definition of sex and the word is and as the prosecutors relentless probe the president over his affair with former intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton's chief inquisitor, Kenneth Starr, appears off camera only briefly to question the president, and the tension between them is palpable on the president's face. As much debate as it may provoke now, in years to come the real worth of this videotaped document is in what it means to the future of due process and the American system of government. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Cigar, Mr. President?
By now, you either own this video or you do not and never will. Clinton bashers love it and Clinton supporters try to pretend it doesn't exist. No one can deny that it is a document of lasting historical significance. There are many interesting, if oftentimes uncomfortable, segments in these four hours of grand jury testimony, such as Clinton's inane argument over the definition of the word "is" and his convoluted ideas about what really constitutes sexual intercourse. For me, though, one single moment makes this video worth every single penny. Clinton was obviously not expecting any questions about his novel cigar technique, and the look on his face when the subject is broached is absolutely priceless.

Clinton KO's Ken XXX Starr
This video tells us as much about Bill Clinton, who is the only person seen on the screen, as about the persecutorial team headed by Ken Starr. The incessant questioning solely on the sexual aspect makes a mockery of the constitutional threshold for impeachment, "Bribery, Treason, and other High Crimes and Misdemeanors".

Mr. Clinton comes across as a very smart lawyer, able to slice the language for nuances of meanings, of "is", "alone", ...(The prosecutors themselves indulge in such semantics, asking as to what specific acts were included or excluded in a definition, what the word "causes" is understood as, ...). The impatience shown by the public in general, and the Republicans in particular for such legalistic hair-splitting is not justified. He is after all, defending himself from the attack of a team of lawyers, who have virtually unlimited time and money at their disposal. He is not obliged to offer them more than asked, and at times when he chooses not to answer a question, considering it too personal and embarrassing, well, tough luck, Mr. Eisenberg! You have the choice (I think) to give him total immunity, and then compel him to answer! Of course, an ordinary citizen would have taken the fifth for many of the questions, but that option is not viable for a political office holder in general, more so for one who is occupying the highest office of the land.

The quality of the video and audio left a lot to be desired. It truly looked like a home-video, and at times, less polished than that. I would have liked to see the faces of the prosecuting team, when they were asking the highly (I am amazed how quickly this word entered casual discourse!) "salacious" questions. It is said that in general, Ken Star's team were on better behaviour, cognizant of the video taping process. I would hazard a guess that they would have been on even better behaviour, had the camera turned towards them, when they were asking the questions.

Mr. Bittman comes across like an attack dog worthy of James Carville's approbation. His very first question is "Mr. President, were you physically intimate with Monica Lewinsky?". As a response, the President read a statement, basically admitting to "involve inappropriate, intimate contact". This must have bowled over TheTeam, which promptly takes a break, to discuss strategy. Their state of confusion shows up in the first question after the break. Consider the following exchange:

Q: Mr. President, you statement indicates that your contacts with Ms. Lewinsky did not involve any inappropriate intimate contact. Mr. Bittman...

CLINTON: No, sir, indicates that it did, inappropriate intimate contact.

Q: OK, it did involve inappropriate intimate contact.

So it goes. Remember these are high-priced, high-intensity lawyers, zealots in their pursuit of Clinton for the past forty million dollars!

Considering the import of the case and the occasion, TheTeam seems to be very ill-prepared with many things. There is many a time where there is only one copy of a document. Why couldn't they have come there with enough for everybody there?

The tape should be viewed as a legal document, which it is. There are many occurrences of repeated questioning on the same topic, repeated, receiving repeated, almost identical answers. That's the nature of the beast. It would have been nice, if the tape were given to an editing house, to be condensed to a 2-hour version, taking out such duplications, things said purely "for the record" to satisfy legal obligations, ceremonial introductions, (and things such as would you state your full name, did you take an oath to tell the truth, ...), references to xxxxxxx

It is said that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich if he so wishes. Getting a conviction later, is entirely a different story. Even if she is unsuccessful in that, the process severely strains the finances of any but the very rich, so in a sense he wins even when he loses! Mr. Bittman unintentionally reveals the fanatical zeal of TheTeam, when he asks the question,

QUESTION: Well, we are interested -- I know from the questions that we received from the grand jurors they are interested in knowing what was going on in your mind when you were reading Grand Jury Exhibit 2 and what you understood that definition to include.

One wonders if the question is really that of a grand jury member, or his own.

The tape is must see for history, constitutional, legal buffs. And properly edited (to about one-fourth its size), it would be good viewing for the common folks too. I am sure such condensed versions would be available in future. As it is, it beats the length of the boring movie, "Titanic", albeit managing it to be far more interesting. END

Not worth the money..
If you feel compelled to see him lie, buy it. Otherwise, forget it. I bought it as a collector's item.

Enjoyed the Liar in Chief in Action
SlickWilly in his finest hour. Our founding fathers pledged 'Thier Lives, Thier Fortunes and Their Sacred Honor' when they set out to found this country. Bill Clinton sells his 'Sacred Honor' cheaply in this video. My, how far we have come. Bill Clinton's Legacy, in one convenient video tape. Buy it, and watch it with your children.

Regards, Professor Jerry Mander.

Titilating, Stimulating, Provoking
Man. After I saw this, I lost all respect for the leader of the free world. I have to admit, though, it's entertaining... in a Jerry Springer sort of way. END ... Read more

Amazon.com

Dahmer, Gacy, Manson--these names have earned their place among America's most notorious cultural icons. America is fascinated by its serial killers--who they are, what they've done, and how they got away with it for so long. Creating the mental picture of these killers is the job of criminal specialists known as profilers, people who analyze and dissect the intricate motives that fuel these frighteningly intelligent stalkers. In the four-part A&E series Serial Killers: Profiling the Criminal Mind, former FBI agent John Douglas walks you through up-close case studies of a few of the most savage men in the history of law enforcement.

Probably the best known of them all is Charles Manson. He is the bastard son of a prostitute who was pushed toward crime and rebellion at a young age by his uncle, the only role model he had. By the time he began piecing together his plan to instigate global Armageddon, Charles Manson had spent more than half of his life behind bars. Charles Manson: Vol. 4 tells of Manson's childhood, his life in jail, and the development and dynamics of his cultlike "Family" and follows the trial that captivated a nation. But unlike other serial killers, Manson's smart and coercive nature allowed him to keep his hands clean while his Family carried out his vision of Helter Skelter.--Rob Bracco ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Repetitive Coverage
I bought this video after reading a book by author Jason Moss entitled THE LAST VICTIM which explored the complexities of the notorious CLOWN KILLER a.k.a. JW Gacy. What I was disappointed in was that this documentary by A&E repeats the same clips throughout the entire piece and the narration is nothing we haven't heard in the news. I was hoping to learn what the media had not told us, as this was an optional assignment for a college criminology class, and I was hopeful that it would shed light on the sickness that was John Gacy. This video fell far short and I should have saved my money.

Average but Expected More Insight
This isn't the first A&E documentary on Serial Killers I've seen and unfortunately it wasn't as informative as I expected. Having to view the material for a college criminolgy course, I was disappointed that much of the info [and even more so the images} were just repeats of what local news stations aired when the horror was unfolding before our nation's eyes. I was hoping this film would delve deep enough to bring us more info.

Of course the music adds the eeriness needed for a story like Dahmer's but hopefully A&E's future documentaries will be more substantive.

Informative But Lacking
I wanted to view this documentary as a result of reading author Jason Moss's book, THE LAST VICTIM, which focused mainly on the serial killer, J.W. Gacy. I expected more, but got much less.

This is an A&E original documentary which uses the same stale images frame after frame, sometimes boring the viewer with facts that really don't expose much of what made this psychotic KILLER CLOWN tick.

I was disappointed I purchased this tape rather than just renting it as I doubt I'd pass it on to others interested in the subject of true crime. There are other more informative and well done documentaries out there than this one.

Disturbing and Cool
It talks about Manson and Dahmer, and the state of their mental status, experiences, and possibly why they did what they did. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Conspiracy Proved
If you are interested in the assassination of JFK and you thought that there might have been a conspiracy, this video will definitely make up your mind. There is a lot of information given to prove that there was a conspiracy. This video is a must have for anyone!

The only totally candid interview with Jim Garrison.
This documentary represents far more than what the cover seems to say. I know. I was not only one of the film's producers, I worked for Garrison for those few historic years he took on the burden of investigating the assassination of one of our nation's greatest Presidents. In the hands of the filmmaker's technology in 1992, the evidence is presented in a way which would have totally altered history, had that technology existed in 1967 when Garrison decided to risk his entire reputation as a distinguished D.A. and challenge the Warren Report's corrupt conclusion. It was not President Johnson's design that Kennedy be murdered. If that were true, he wouldn't have ridden in a convertible car just a few cars behind Kennedy's presidential limo. "Triangulation of fire," was the sophisticated plan of motorcade murder devised by CIA operatives long before 11/22/63. If LBJ had known what that meant, he have told President Kennedy that he'd meet him at the Trade Mart luncheon and skipped the motorcade. Those who are responsible for the assassination of JFK are well known to foreign governments (intelligence depts). I know. I was assigned by Garrison to contact and then meet with General DeGaulle's Secret Service Director, Andre Ducret, who told me what happened in Dallas when JFK was assassinated for political reasons. I gathered that evidence and returned it to Garrison in New Orleans in June of 1968. I arrived with with a heavy heart. Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June, 1968 while I met with General De Gaulle's top officials. I wondered if my trip had something to do with the murder of Robert Kennedy. The member of the Deuxieme Bureau with whom I met during late May, 1968, was a close friend of Bobby Kennedy, and he was devastated at the assassination of his friend, RFK. I was also devastated because I was on foreign soil and working for Garrison and the truth seemed to be within my grasp. I was looking forward, at the time, to bringing home the evidence gathered by the intelligence agents and the head of the Secrect Service for General De Gaulle, the head of France. This film doesn't show all that because the filmmakers were restriced to incontrovertible evidence based on compelling eye-witness accounts. If you want names then read about the trial of E. Howard Hunt recounted in Mark Lane's report and best-seller, PLAUSIBLE DENIAL (Thunders Mouth Press, 1992). The names of those responsible are there. Many former CIA operatives know the truth, including Marita Lorenz, who constantly risked her life to tell the truth about the murder of a dead President.

The fact is that people continue to be interested, fascinated,even obsessed, with the subject(and will be for centuries to come), no one with the authority to file criminal complaints has done anything about it except Jim Garrison. Against all odds, Mark Lane told the world what was not true with his book, RUSH TO JUDGMENT in the 60's and awakened the people of our nation to the fear but Garrison spent his life as a public servant in his effort to solve the case. "JFK Assassination: The Jim Garrison Tapes" is a documentary that you will never forget. And someday, it will be one of the primary pieces of "evidence" in the correction of history. Lee Harvey Oswald was not alone. There were experts who were paid to kill JFK, and they got away with it because they were backed by powerful people. Very powerful people. Look at this film, and then consider it in light of all the American political events which occur during your lifetime. If I die tomorrow, I will never regret having been a part of making this film. And I will always feel that I had something to do with righting the terrible wrong that was done in the record of our history. In other words, I will not have to ask what I might have done for our country.

An excellent intro to the mystery of JFK's assassination
As I write this, the fortieth anniversary of John F. Kennedy's assassination is one week away, and there are far more questions about his death now than there ever have been. I have been intensely interested and disturbed by the assassination of JFK for many years now; as I personally do not hold JFK in high regard, I can barely fathom the emotional trauma his still-unexplained death brings to those who loved and supported him at the time and who honor him today. Whatever you think of the man, there is no question that his assassination in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963, changed America, destroying not only the idyllic dreams of Camelot but invoking what has now become a permanent mistrust of government at the highest level in the hearts and minds of the American people. Many, many men and women have devoted their lives to studying the tragedy that took place in Dealey Plaza on that terrible November day, and I am hoping that the event's thirtieth anniversary will reawaken an American public to a travesty of justice that has been somewhat forgotten during the turbulent past two years in American history. This video, The Assassination of JFK, makes for an excellent introduction to the truly incredible story of this tragedy, although it certainly cannot begin to cover all of the questions and inconsistencies of the "official" Warren Commission report on Kennedy's death.

The first half hour of this video is devoted to Kennedy's life, the pivotal events of his shortened presidency, and the possible implications his decisions and intentions played in his death. Basically, the viewer will see a lot of background material explaining the different motives of a number of groups hostile to JFK. I think the video makes a mistake in actually blaming certain groups, though, as it basically accuses all of the usual suspects without explaining exactly how they came together to change history: the Mafia, right-wing extremists, anti-Castro zealots incensed at JFK's Cuba policies and his betrayal of the freedom fighters who died in the Bay of Pigs fiasco, a hostile faction of the CIA, J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI, and the wealthy oil barons of Texas. The possible motives of each of these groups are summarized rather well, but the video really doesn't get any farther than the pointing of fingers in a number of directions at once.

It is not until the mid-point of the presentation that one actually examines the assassination itself, and the material included here only grazes the surface of what we know. One sees several replays of the Zapruder film which shows the kill shot in strikingly gory detail as well as a number of other shots of the motorcade and Dealey Plaza. No witnesses are ever interviewed, but a number of prominent assassination theorists state their opinions on various aspects of the case. Special attention is given to the official "magic bullet" theory espoused by the Warren Commission. I think anyone who takes even the most superficial look at the evidence regarding this most remarkable of bullets will agree that the official version of the assassination is ludicrously absurd. Noted pathologist Cyril Wecht gives a very convincing explanation of just how impossible the official scenario is.

Lee Harvey Oswald is naturally discussed, but not to a very significant degree; of course, Oswald may be the most mysterious man in American history, and all of the Oswald sightings and stories of the days leading up to November 22, 1963, make the man a total conundrum. This video does not declare Oswald completely innocent, but it comes close, explicitly arguing that the government decided Oswald was the lone gunman as soon as they took him into custody. Casting aside all of the questions about the unusual (and illegal, as Texas law forbade the deceased's body being removed from the state before an autopsy could be performed there) and questionable autopsy findings (and the evidence of forgery of several autopsy photos), this video clearly insinuates that Hoover and the powers that be turned justice on its head; they "knew" the murderer was Oswald, and all of the shenanigans surrounding the autopsy and the Warren Commission investigation were engineered on the premise of convincing the American people that Oswald acted alone.

This is a more than worthwhile video for any American who wants to know more about the JFK assassination, but let me assure those unfamiliar with assassination research and study that nothing you see or hear here can even compare to the extraordinarily disturbing stories that many diligent private researchers have put forth about the murder and its aftermath. Americans of all ages, whether we be Democrats or Republicans, men or women, black or white, should continue to demand and seek the truth about this pivotal event that changed America forever in a matter of six seconds. For those who want to know more, this video is a great starting place.

A Must Have
This video gets in depth with Jim Garrison, and it tells of his investigation into the assassination of President Kennedy. This is a perfect companion to "On the Trail of the Assassins" as it takes you into the whole case, and interviews all the primary figures involved with the investigation. Highly recommended!

Excellent Video and Excellent Customer Service
Excellent Video and Excellent Customer Service

I am impressed with the product, it is an in depth and informative documentary.

iNetVideo provides great customer service....will do business again

Mike ... Read more

Reviews (5)

good tape that asks the REAL questions, but.......
a little more one sided that favors the Warren Commission.

first of all, Dan Rather hosts the 70 min. special. come on! Dan Rather? he was one of the first reporters to see the Zapruda film and himself said that Kennedy's said went foward and never mentioned the violent back and to the left motion. he later stated that he only saw the video once, and he got confussed. yeah, and pigs fly.

secondly, i love the way the one of the journalist in particular covers the assassination. he asks the real tough questions and even showed up former CIA director Richard Helms. he asked some very good questions, and it's people like him that should run the commision to investigate JFK's death.

the video covers most of the aspects of Kennedy's death, but it tends to favor the Warren Commission and the single bullet theory. the special never mentions the Moorman photo showing the shooter on the grassy knoll, never shows the different camera angles of the assassination, and in it's recreation of Dealy Plaza, doesn't take into account that a tree stood in the way of the first couple of shots from the sixth floor of the depository.

the video is one of the better JFK assassination tapes and does include interviews with Oliver Stone, Governor John Connally, and other key members of the assassintion, including Marina Oswald, Ruth Paine who to this day believe Oswald killed JFK. yet what Paine fails to mention is that her husband worked for Bell Helicopter which was associated with the CIA.
the video has vintage coverage of the assassination and rare interviews with other key figures such as Johnny Brewer, Officer McDonald, D.A. Wade, and LBJ.

good overall video.

Just The Facts M'am
Probably the most sound and focused of the JFK assasination videos. Like a good lawyer, this show cuts through the bull and just lays out the details in a good sound package. This is a great place to start even if you are determined to go running around for the rest of your life chasing phantoms. Too bad there isn't a DVD edition yet.

History teacher in Montana says .... A++++
As a teacher of Senior High students, we spend a large amount of time on the Kennedy assassination. This video is the best supplement I have during our studies. CBS lives up to their great reputation in presenting the FACTS....and some things for my students to think about! I would highly recommend!!!

This is See BS- Not CBS
A very poor program that is totally biased toward the Lone Gunmen myth. Anyone observing the Zapruder Film is going to have questions if they aren't blind. Fortunately there are other better videos and books .

Great video in full detail
If you like "48 Hours" you'll love this video. This is a 70 minute special that focuses on the facts of JFK's assassination and who the assassin(s) was/were. You'll hear from witnesses, people who knew Lee Harvey Oswald, and every other major figure that was involved. I've seen a lot of JFK assassination videos and this one is one of my favorites. ... Read more

Description

Trail along with fire sleuths as they discover the mysterious source of a series of L.A. store fires, and capture a surprising suspect filmed by NOVA. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Learn more about James Files and the rest of the truth.
I am probably not an impartial reviewer, since I know much more about this story than the average person.

Therefore I know James Files has done the american public, freedom and democracy, a big favor by telling the truth. Whether it will ever reach the masses, is an entirely different question. The forces that have succesfully covered it up for 40 years are not sitting idle and can only be exposed by YOU, the people.

One Star -- Just For Laughs!
This is, in my view, just another example of someone crawling out of the assassination woodwork and reaching for the spotlight.

Of course, WHY a person would want to voluntarily brand himself for the rest of his life as the killer of the President, well, I guess that's another discussion altogether. For it's quite obvious, based on every scrap of physical evidence that's before us in this case, that NO ONE (Mr. Files or anyone else) fired a "frontal" shot in Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22, 1963.

If you want a few laughs of a complete "non-event", then you might want to pick up a copy of this VHS videotape. If you want a much better account of what occurred in Dallas in 1963, then a VHS copy of 1964's "Four Days In November" (MGM/UA Home Video) is essential.

the last piece in the puzzle
This is my opinion. All cons know that to tell a convincing lie, you tell the whole truth, except you change one fact that makes it a lie. This man's account fits together with all the most credible information from eyewitnesses and leaked from inside intelligence sources, except for one thing. Files didn't fire a shot. He was Chuck Nicoletti's driver, who was a genuine mob hit man. Files' job was to watch Nicoletti's back. In this story, he puts another mob hit man, John Roselli, in that role and himself in the role of shooter. That's the lie. John Roselli actually fired the fatal shot. Files was with Nicoletti as he always was. The hitters in the Book Depository were probably the two Cubans from Alpha66 that Oswald was with in Mexico. The operation came down from the Cabell brothers through Atlee. Oswald coordinated the shooters and to his surprise, took the fall. Ruby did what he had to do.

Why would he lie? It was a renegade operation. Everybody else is dead. Except Files got a new identity, maybe because he provided the details to the powers that be, who wanted to know. But now he's afraid, because of the publicity from the JFK movie. By putting himself in a starring role, he hopes to get himself too far out in public eye to be wacked.

An extremely interesting interview
Let me start by saying, I've been a serious student of the JFK assassination for the last 27 years; I've read and re-read all the major books and articles including the great anti-conspiracy work of Posner's, as well as the much vaunted Warren report; I've also seen all the major documentaries and most importantly,have THOUGHT many hundreds of hours about the case.

As for the video in question, let me say this: although I am the most skeptical and "doubting Thomas" kind of guy you'll ever meet, I find many compelling kernels of truth to James Files' (the subject of the video) interview---though I'm not quite ready to proclaim him as completely sincere yet.

Yes, there are a few discrepancies in Files' story. However, the man's recall of NON EVENTS would be extremely difficult to conjure up (if he were, indeed, lying). Simply put, a pathological individual who was simply making up a story wouldn't be concerned with minute, trivial details, but with the larger picture. Files' not only has amazing recall of such little details, but when viewed as a mosaic of the larger picture, they all seems to fit. But another important element emerges in File's remarkable story.

Interestingly, I had always assumed that the Secret Service impersonator (in the Grassy Knoll) was, as a confederate in a larger conspiracy plot, used to protect the frontal shooter. My explanation to myself of the impersonator's apparent brashness (when confronted by police) was simply that he must have had some real brass gonads, or simply stated, was so cocksure of his phony credentials' (and, perhaps, his relationship to a larger governmental or institutional conspiracy), that fear wasn't really an issue. But innately, I'd always questioned this assumption without really knowing why.

Enter in Files' revelations: not only do they shed new light on my assumptions (whether by truth or design), but they make me realize I had probably been viewing the whole Grassy knoll sequence in a skewered light. As Files' explains it, his presence in the knoll was only as a back-up---in case the assassination didn't go down the way it was supposed to. Thus, the impersonator was also a back up and was to only be used if really necessary. Now, it all made sense to me: If Oswald was to be "set up" as the rear shooter, then a frontal gunman would NOT be expected to shoot, but only be used in a back-up mode. And this would also explain the inordinate 'brashness' of the impersonator who only displayed his authentic-looking ID's when he really HAD TO. Not a story likely created by someone so egotistical as wanting to feign involvement.

How would Files have dreamed up this simple, yet remarkable observation if he were simply fictionalizing? Two explanations emerge: 1) either he IS, in fact, the frontal gunman and his actual participation provides true insight into what really happened; or 2) he is one of the most prolific liars AND students of the assassination (possessing an enormous database of info) to emerge in the last 3 decades. Problem is, Files simply doesn't come across as being THAT sophisticated or book smart (although he does appear very street savvy). Whether File's is, or isn't telling the truth, his unique descriptions of the Grassy Knoll sequence put pieces of the puzzle into place in a way I have never heard anyone *else* suggest. This seeming familiarity with the event has an odd ring of truth to it and suggests in some form, an INTIMATE knowledge about the assassination.

In conclusion: the only way File's story could be corroborated would be if a second interview took place, and dozens of minute details mentioned in the first interview were presented to him for spontaneous validation.

Whatever the outcome, this video is definitely a must see for any serious student of the JFK case. Decide for yourself.

AMAZING !!
This movie is the best JFK assassination film I have seen. I have seen about 15 different videos and this one is by far the most believable. He is so detailed on every single item and he has the guy who interviewed him back up what he says because everything was checked up on. Get this video. ... Read more

Description

He is perhaps the most beloved man in American history -- his name issynonymous with honesty and righteousness.But in his own lifetime, Abraham Lincolnwas hated by so many that an envelope in his desk marked "Assassination" was stuffedwith 100 threatening letters.What drove the handsome actor John Wilkes Booth to killLincoln, and how did he go about it?Was the Confederate government behind him? Was he motivated by a personal vendetta?The questions that have haunted the Americanpeople for 130 years are finally answered in THE LINCOLN ASSASSINATION. Enlisting the help of forensic experts and modern historians, this engrossing programunravels the myths and misconceptions to bring you the definitive examination ofLincoln's death, the tragedy that shocked and enraged America. ... Read more

Description

CNN, the world news leader, brings together this video collection of the best reports from the last decade. Each video presents the curcumstances surrounding and the impact of a current person, place, or event. Excellent viewing for history buffs and students. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Gets better as it progresses
The cover of this video is deceptive. It actually has very little to do with Jeffery Dahmer. Nonetheless, it has some facinating stories about some other, less famous, serial killers. The best story is about the guy who worked in the hospital. 'Murder by Number' starts off boorish, but gets better towards the end.

A little uneven in presentation
There is a lot to like about this documentary. It touches on numerous aspects of the serial murder phenomenon, and is unafraid of being critical of how the phenomenon is represented. Especially impressive is the segment on how the "serial murder problem" is misrepresented. There are also segments dealing with several lesser known offenders such as Bobby Joe Long, Christine Falling, and Wesley Alan Dodd, including interviews with each. My only major criticism is that the documentary too readily embraces the brain trauma explanation for serial offending, when there are other causal factors that may do as good of a job (or better) of explaining the etiology of serial homicide.

For Anyone Even Remotely Interested In Serial Killers
I first saw this documentary on CNN back in '93 and have watched it several times since then. It's one of the most informative, interesting, documentaries on the "phenonemon" of serial murder out there. They really go in depth. Various known killers are feautured, including interviews with 3 different ones; a male nurse convicted of murdering 37 of his patients, a woman convicted for the killings of children she babysat, and a child murderer who was executed by hanging several years back in Washington state.

This video is a MUST for anybody who wants to learn more about the reality of serial death. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Serial Killers 101...except for Manson
I also agree with John Faye. Ted Bundy. Edmund Kemper or another Serial Killer would have made this Video set a must. As explained by Mr Faye, Charles Manson was a mastermind for mass murder, but not, by any means, a serial killer.

But the information and research is a must for people seeking basic information on serial murders. The quality is decent. If you are an experienced collector in the subject, you may want to skip it...alot of the info is already in your criminology library at home.

If you are also interested in Manson, then this collection is for you. The video regarding him was informative.

It's a shame they don't make almost any videos or books on Edmund Kemper...a most intriguing Serial Killer...

Thank you, John Fay!
Before I start, I HAVEN'T seen these videos and am now in two minds as to whether to bother or not.

Thank you, John Fay! As a profiler and CSI and lecturer in both, it's SOOOO nice to see someone who knows the difference between a serial killer and a mass murderer! I cannot for the life of me understand either why Manson is referred to as a serial killer - he never even went near the houses concerned, just got someone else to do his dirty work! I personally can think of other people I would rather see on video than Dahmer and Gacy as examples, what about Ed Gein, Henry Lee Lucas, and the likes? And without sounding "picky", if I see another video with John Douglas giving the same old profile to practically every serial killer in existence, I'll go crazy! If you read all his stuff, his profiles are all practically the same (male, 35-40, driving Volkswagens, hate their mother' and killed animals as children!). I can name much better, and more qualified profilers to be making videos about these subjects than Douglas but I'm not naming them - the ones concerned know who I mean - and I don't mean myself. (I wish!) I have very little faith in FBI profilers! Thanks for the great review, you've just made my mind up for me!

Manson is NOT a Serial Killer
The chief reason why I gave this otherwise well-made collection/series 3 instead of 5 stars is because they decided to include Charles Manson, which would've been fine had the collection been focused not on serial killers but on bizarre cults. Manson is not a serial killer. His was a "fly by night operation" at most. More along the lines of spree/mass killings. A & E should know better. They should've instead included Ted Bundy or the Hillside Stranglers. THEY are "serial killers" in the "proper" sense of the word. I'm not making this up, it's just reality. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

The Watergate Story that Tells It ALL!
I ran across this documentary when I was doing a presentation in my high school law class. I was interested in the Watergate Scandal, but this documentary turned me into quite the fanatic! It does a great job of covering all the bases! It's very informative and engaging! I liked it so much that I have to buy it! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

One of the best films of 1992, this acclaimed documentary focuses on the alleged murder in June 1990 of 64-year-old Bill Ward by his brother Delbert, 59, a simple dairy farmer whose defense became a rallying cause for the citizens of Munnsville, a tiny farming community in central New York. Known by all of Munnsville as harmless hermits, the Ward brothers (also including Lyman and Roscoe) live an 18th-century lifestyle in their tiny, grimy shack, sleeping in the same bed through cold winters and tending daily to their hayfields and livestock. Semiliterate and stunted by minimal exposure to the outside world, the Wards are disheveled children in the bodies of aging men; and when Delbert is charged with suffocating his ailing brother Bill, he's a prime target for legal manipulation and a media circus that's immediately drawn to his case. Filmmakers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky spent nearly a year with the Wards and the Munnsville citizens who rallied to Delbert's defense, and their efforts prove that reality is often more compelling than even the richest fictional drama. As a slice-of-life study of eccentricity, country-folk stereotypes, small-town wisdom, and the power of the media, Brother's Keeper is funny, fascinating, and full of compassionate humanity. It's also a riveting courtroom mystery with characters that no casting director could improve upon, tracking the course of justice while leaving the viewer to mull over the truth behind Delbert Ward's alleged crime. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (16)

A penetrating glimpse into rural America
This is the story of the murder trail of Delbert Ward, one of four outcast elderly brothers in the town of Munnsville, New York, population 500, not far from Onieda. The brothers lived together in a dilapidated shack, raised cows and rarely came to town. The didn't bathe or shave much and were generally outcasts.

And then, one of the brothers died and his brother was accused of his murder. The town banded together to help him as it seemed as if he were coerced in confessing. He had an IQ of 63 and could neither read nor write. The other brothers were equally as simple.

The trial got national media attention, and even Connie Chung came out to interview Delbert and the people of the town. How this all effected everyone concerned is painstakingly recorded in this documentary.

Us city-folk rarely get such a penetrating glimpse into the lives of a rural community and the townspeople, and the three surviving brothers all shine with humanity. We get to know the people. We get to see the trial. We hold our breath during testimony. Rumors fly. The case becomes absurd. All filmed with utmost compassion.

This is not a fun movie to watch but it rings with a universal truth and the viewer comes away with an enriched sense of humanity.

Thoughtful and moving.
A near impossible documentary to categorize, this touching film focuses on the alleged murder of Bill Ward by his brother Delbert, a plain dairy farmer in the central New York community of Munnsville. His defense becomes a rallying cry to his neighbors as he becomes a target of speculation, abuse and manipulation. At times it seems this story is about the exploitation of country-folk by the media, or the encroachment of the city on rural communities like Munnsville, or the importance of community activism in the judicial system, or abuses of power by an unsympathetic police department. But at its core, this is a yarn about four brothers, hermits, living a nearly extinct lifestyle among cows and hayfields, knowing only each other in their day-to-day life.

Berlinger and Sinofsky play with their audience. Lulling us into a false sense of knowledge, we casually apply stereotypes to the people of Munnsville and then, by watching how they respond to this crisis, slowly we are forced to conclude that, like the media circus that followed the Ward case for so many months, we are as wrong in our preconceptions and as quick to leap to judgment about these people as all those who've done them wrong. The people of Munnsville are not simple. Or stupid. They chose their way of life, they did not fall into it.

Despite which, the Ward brothers are, at times, seen as sad; illiterate and deprived of human contact as they are. When Lyman Ward testifies on his brother's behalf, he shakes and is unable to speak because people make him nervous. This scene is so touching - it is to the directors credit that they were deft enough just to let the camera record his trembling in silence. That image stays with the audience long after the film ends.

Brother's Keeper is more compelling than any fictional drama, painting broad strokes on a very small canvas. The story is personal, compassionate, and powerful.

Brothers Keeper
This is one of the most wonderful films I have ever seen. Why it was not given the academy award for best documentary the year of it's release I'll never know. This film will captivate you from begining to end. This is a sad yet masterfully told story of a simple people who by the death of a brother are propelled into the not so simple world of the judicial system. It is also a feel good story of a town who will do most anything to back their own. Im sure after seeing this Documentary you will be as moved as I was.

A dark, disturbing, yet riveting documentary
This one of the most profoundly disturbing movies I have ever seen. The documentary details the events surrounding the trial of Delbert Ward for the alleged murder of his brother Bill, two of four elderly brothers living as near-hermits in a tiny shack near the rural township of Munnsville, New York. After an autopsy revealed that Bill might not have died under natural circumstances, Delbert was questioned and signed a confession, though he might not have been mentally competent to do so.

Initially, the viewer responds to the sheer oddness of the Ward brothers, their way of life, their extraordinary social isolation, and the way of life they have carved for themselves, which was utterly unlike that of the rest of American society. At times, one feels one is taking a vacation trip along the edge of the abyss. Gradually, however, the film takes on far more nuanced and subtle aspects in relating their story to the town as a whole, and their growing support of one of their residents being judged and accused by outsiders.

This is not a movie that clears up any mysteries or comes to any firm conclusions. Filmmakers Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky start off with a perplexing possible crime and end in a confusing fog. One doesn't know quite what to think (though a possible mercy killing of Bill, who was ill at the time of his death, seems a possibility). But the depth and power of the film is undeniable, and it unquestionably belongs on a short list of the best documentary films of recent decades.

just ok
i'v seen a multitude of documentaries, both low and high budget, and although i found the story interesting i felt this film was not up the hype it was given. worth seeing, but not worth owning. ... Read more

Description

Follow the FBI's psychological detectives as they race against time to penetrate the mind of a serial killer, and stop him from striking again. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

go for it
This dvd is just extraordinary, so very interesting and extremely well done. Once again, you have John Douglas in it and that's such a treat for anyone interested in profiling.
This dvd is so interesting that you'll be upset when it's over, buy it without hesitation.

A creepy film about creepy people.
My husband and I watched this together. It's not long enough to keep you enthralled, but it is intriguing to delve into the minds of some of these psychos and see what makes them tick. NOVA does a good job as a documentary, but doesn't really go into depth about the makings of a serial killer, or the profiling of a serial killer. The film would have been much better had it been better researched and lengthier, but it is still a fascinating review of some of the famous serial killers of our time.

A Documentary Written Like A Murder Mystery
NOVA: MIND OF A SERIAL KILLER examines the horrifying reality of serial killers. This video, narrated by THE X-MEN's Patrick Stewart, looks at how law enforcement (FBI, etc.) deals with this type of criminal. The video examines different types of serial killers (organised, disorganised), the makings of a serial killer, case histories, and the process known as criminal profiling. Criminal profiling has been used to track down & convict serial killers like Wayne Williams & others.

The video also tracks down the investigation of murdered prostitutes in the Rochester area. The investigation led to the capture & conviction of Arthur Shawcross. Shawcross was a recently paroled sex slayer who was found responsible of at least 10 murders. Using criminal profiling along with other evidence, the FBI successfully imprisoned Shawcross to a term of life imprisonment.

NOVA: MIND OF A SERIAL KILLER is a must-have for true crime afficionados. Highly recommended.

One of the best documentaries on the topic
This NOVA segment explores the serial murder phenomenon. Although it covers a number of issues related to serial murder, the focus is on the case of Arthur Shawcross, a serial killer who murdered several prostitutes in Rochester, New York. What's fascinating about this particular video is how it builds up to Shawcross' arrest. The documentary does a great job of capturing the sense of terror that must have existed in that community during the time of the murders. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Interesting and Exciting
While the video did not show as much of the missions as I expected, It did show quite a bit. This, I believe was due to the fact that few people actually know where all the Red Cell tapes are. It's worth the money and full of information.