Sometimes I browse through the instant movies that are available on Netflix and I don’t find anything at all worth watching. Sometimes I start a movie and get bored a few minutes into it. A lot of times I keep a movie on in the background while doing something else and never really get into it. But every once in awhile, I easily pick a movie that looks good and it turns out that it actually is. That was the case with Echo of Murder (Who Killed Atlanta’s Children?)

This is a fascinating movie that essentially tells the story of two situations in one. First, there is the case of over 30 murders that took place in Atlanta around the same time in the early 1980’s. These were all murders of black children, both girls and boys. A man was convicted of two of the crimes and loosely linked to the rest by questionable evidence and then the case was dropped. That’s the first part of the story.

The second part of the story is that the first story was picked up by two journalists at SPIN magazine in 2000. These two journalists got wind of the tale and figured that it was loosely related to their music magazine because the man who was convicted of the crimes had been involved in the recording industry. They did their research and brought out the tale that hadn’t yet been told. The second story revealed in the movie is of their journalistic approach to uncovering the first story.

It’s an interesting movie. Is it a stunning cinematic presentation? Not really. There are some things that could have been done better. But that’s not the point. The point is that the film manages to touch on a number of different explosive topics and to reveal some great insights into all of them. The main topic was the racism behind the murders themselves, the way they were covered up and the way that people dealt with the journalists as they were trying to uncover the story. Another topic was the approach to journalism itself, how you uncover facts and what responsibilities you have to the public when telling a story like this. Another was about the justice system and how sometimes easing the public’s mind becomes more important than finding the truth about a crime.

The story itself is, of course, horrifying. All of these children died and no one actually knows who the real killer was. There may have been 30 deaths that were all related or there may have been twice that many. They may have been committed by the KKK or by a serial killer or by someone else entirely. We just don’t know. And the fact that most of us didn’t even know about this case is horrifying in and of itself.

Definitely worth a Netflix rental!

One of the things that I love about being in my hometown is that it’s a good time for me to go to the movies. I don’t go out to movies all that often when I’m in San Francisco. This is due mostly to the cost of seeing a full-priced movie there (actual cost plus transportation cost etc.) compared to hitting the matinee with my mom in Tucson. It’s also due to the fact that there are so many other cheap/free/similarly-priced events and activities to enjoy in San Francisco so it seems like a waste to spend that time and money on a mainstream movie. And I suppose it’s due a bit to the fact that I don’t ever find it all that easy to find a friend in San Francisco who also wants to spend the time and money on the same mainstream movie that I do. So going to the movies is something I don’t do much anymore but still love to do when I’m back with my family.

I wouldn’t say that we typically see the smartest movies although some of the ones that we go watch are certainly smart. I’m just as happy to see a dumb chick flick with my mom and sister as to see the latest smart indie film. It’s more about the experience and the time spent together than the film itself. So I wasn’t necessarily expecting much from Blind Side which we went to go see this morning. All I really expected was that it would be a decent story with decent actors and that we’d have a good time together just hanging out at the theatre. We did have a good time together but Blind Side ended up being better than I’d expected it to be.

For those who don’t know, the movie is based on a book which is based on the true story of a teenager who grew up in the ghetto and ended up homeless when he’s taken in by a rich white family. The story is fairly predictable … they become his family, they help him with school, he ends up succeeding and gets a football scholarship. It’s a pretty straightforward story line.

However there were definitely some smart things about it that I liked. The main thing was that the movie depicts the fact that these rich white Republicans have some self-doubt as to their own motivations for taking this kid in. They wonder if they’re doing the right thing and if they’re doing it for the right reasons. Are they just getting a feel-good kick out of helping someone out? Are they pushing their own expectations on to him? Although the movie doesn’t delve deeply into these feelings, it poses the questions and acknowledges the fact that this is an issue that people in their position would have to deal with internally. Although I think that we often see characters in films having to deal with this issue externally (which we see here as well when the mother’s friends question her choice and consider it a charity act) we see it less often in terms of how people themselves question their own motives. It’s a smart twist even if it’s not explored in depth.

There were certainly some aspects of the storyline that I wondered about. The movie depicts this seventeen-year-old kid just naturally fitting in fairly well with this new family. I find it difficult to believe that the transition into a family was easy for him at that point. Based on my own experience working with foster children, there’s just a lot of wariness and a period of adapting that we don’t see in the film. In that way, I don’t think that the film revealed enough about the issues that the characters must have dealt with. So it falls short of what my full expectations would be if I were going to write the film but it exceeded the expectations that I had of it as a mainstream movie.

Mostly I guess I the movie captured my attention less for what it showed than what it didn’t show. It got my curious about the life of Michael Oher and how it all really played out for him as compared to what the movie depicted. I am particularly interested in learning more about how college went for him, how difficult it was to adjust to leaving his new family as soon as they’d adopted him and how hard the transition was to living on his own on a college campus. I am curious about the politics behind the NCAA investigation of his choice to attend the alma mater of his new foster parents - why did the NCAA do this and what other cases similar to this have there been. The movie interested me because it left this questions open which makes me inclined to do more research into the topic now that I’ve left the theater.

Is Blind Side worth seeing? I probably wouldn’t have bothered in San Francisco but I’m glad that I saw it while back at home. If you saw it, I’d love to know what you thought about it! Leave it in the comments.

What other bloggers have written about Blind Side:

• Televisual - Interesting thoughts on why the movie is making so much money
• Be Happy NYC - Sums up the movie and talks about the fashion in it
• Online Film School - “Overall this film is full of inspiration”
• Scrap with Suzy - A visual post

Every year I try to pick an actor or actress to study to learn more about their films. I always try to pick a star that is truly unique in the choice of characters and the way that those characters are presented. It’s actually not that easy to do. Most movie stars get typecast into certain roles and don’t really do much beyond that single type of character.

Last year I studied the films of Ryan Phillippe. I failed to pick a star to study this year but I’m thinking that I may start late and study up on Johnny Depp. He’s a really unique actor who plays very different types of roles than what most people are playing. And even with those roles that are stereotypical, he manages to spin them in a unique way.

I’ve seen some of his films. Ones I particularly liked were From Hell and What’s Eating Gilbert Grape. But I’m interested in checking out more of what he has to offer. I’ve heard that he’s playing The Mad Hatter in an upcoming release of Alice in Wonderland and I think that’s going to be an amazing role to see him in so I’d like to gain some insight into his work before that comes out.

Any suggestions on the best Johnny Depp films to make sure to see?