"Clemency" is a magnificent film and I would not be surprised to see its star, Alfre Woodard was really, really good in the lead and I would expect to see her nominated for an Oscar for her performance. So why in the heck does the film currently have an overall score of 5.8?! What is the reason for this, as the movie is exceptionally well made. Perhaps people are voting against it for reasons other than the quality of the picture....that's the only thing that makes sense to me.
Woodard plays Warden Williams, a by the book woman who runs a prison where they perform executions. In both cases in the film, the lethal injection is done VERY realistically...so much so that it's a bit difficult to watch. But this is the reason....because the film is not just about the death penalty but how it impacts on the people who perform them. You see the Warden falling apart from the experiences, but you also see how the Chaplin and guards and the Deputy Warden are impacted as well. So, instead of just being an anti-capital punishment film, it's far, far deeper....making the story a difficult but rewarding experience.
Overall, a quality film in nearly every way and the reason I gave it a 9 instead of a 10 was one scene--where the overuse of the handycam (the 'unsteady cam') in one nauseating scene where the roving camera was unwelcome and didn't fit in with the rest of the otherwise well-filmed picture.
Woodard plays Warden Williams, a by the book woman who runs a prison where they perform executions. In both cases in the film, the lethal injection is done VERY realistically...so much so that it's a bit difficult to watch. But this is the reason....because the film is not just about the death penalty but how it impacts on the people who perform them. You see the Warden falling apart from the experiences, but you also see how the Chaplin and guards and the Deputy Warden are impacted as well. So, instead of just being an anti-capital punishment film, it's far, far deeper....making the story a difficult but rewarding experience.
Overall, a quality film in nearly every way and the reason I gave it a 9 instead of a 10 was one scene--where the overuse of the handycam (the 'unsteady cam') in one nauseating scene where the roving camera was unwelcome and didn't fit in with the rest of the otherwise well-filmed picture.