Don't listen to the negative reviews

A lot of fun.

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

It's a documentary in the mold of the mondo films or Faces of Death, and the film mostly consists of archival footage, but some of it appears to have been shot by a cameraman specifically for the film (The Kennedy assassination zoom in shots on the window and tracking shot inside the interior where Oswald fired and the man demonstrating Whitman's behavior appeared as if they might have been made just for this film, as well as some of the earlier footage). Obviously don't watch it if you're unwilling to see violent and gruesome images. Often it just discusses the material and has little graphic material to show, but they don't shy away from people being shot on screen and even a few suicide or after death photos.The beginning was the most interesting part because all of the footage was just everyday violent scenes and showcased the gritty streets of the most dangerous American cities. It seemed initially like it had an underlying message and was more artfully directed than something like FoD. Quite a depressing atmosphere to the whole thing, but then all of the iconic scenes of successful or attempted assassinations of famous figures (Wallace, Reagan, MLK, JFK, and his brother Robert), followed by a few mass shootings/snipers, serial killers, Jonestown, etc. occurred--some more obscure than others. Though it's interesting if you haven't seen a lot of this footage, it does become a bit rote, especially if you're familiar with any of the content. I'd already seen the footage from Bundy and Kemper, and a few others--unfortunately, most of the archival footage is not edited together in a unique way and has rather banal commentary.Aside from some occasionally inventive editing and the strong start, and some decent music choices, most of the footage is available on Youtube, and this is only of note as a clip compilation film with little direction other than to document a bunch of violent scenarios, usually by category rather than chronologically. It offers no real insight into the American condition, why the violence occurs, or how to ameliorate it, and very few statistics (all shoehorned in at the beginning). It's also wrong at a few points--average IQ for murderers of the type presented tend to be below 100, but the more charming and higher IQ killers usually get all the media attention (Might have been flimsy data at the time, but I'm just pointing that out). As well as the odd suggestion that people in prison for life or with a long sentence would be released because of prison overpopulation or something (They presumed Sirhan Sirhan would be released just 3-4 years after the film debuted in '81). Absolutely no documented information is included to substantiate any of these claims or even any concrete examples are given (they could have at least interviewed a few cops or legislators or something). The ending with Lennon's peace vigils is rather tepid, but it seems they were pressured to end on a more positive note.A quick listing of footage or details in the film: Wallace, Lennon, Reagan, MLK, JFK, and his brother Robert (there are also Sirhan Sirhan interviews), all either successfully or unsuccessfully assassinated; Ted Bundy, Edmund Kemper, Wayne Henlon and Dean Corll, Brenda Spencer, John Wayne Gacy, Mark Essex (and two others), Charles Whitman, Jonestown Massacre, Tony Kiritsis, Manson Family, Robert Smith, James Hoskins, and some very brief footage of the Vietnam War. There's some other content, but that's the bulk of it.

Of course that if we watch it after "Bowling for Columbine", perhaps it will mean not much for you, but it definitely sets a horrible, sad and real background to all the violence phenomena that the USA has been living after 1963, and after a long journey through history, it ends up in the contemporary times of when the movie was made: 1982. The documentary is explicit, is depressive, sad, but still, very crude and accurate, and studying the theme from different points of view: anthropological, sociological, historical, etc. If you are interested in understanding how USA became so chaotic and yet the world potency, I think this movie is a must.

I first saw this movie as a young teenager in about 1984. Back then I never really got the seriousness of what "Killing of America" was trying to do. In many cases I found myself watching it just to see scenes of violence like it was any random horror movie. Subsequent views have had a polarising effect considering how I once viewed the same footage.Killing of America, is a shockumentary, nothing more nothing less. It's role is not to delve into why the violence is happening or what is turning middle America against itself. I don't believe any movie or documentary can successfully do that, given that there are simply too many factors for why such violence exists.For the film to generate the shocks that it does, even where the extreme violence is 50 years ago, is powerful in itself.The reasons of why Charles Whitman decided to climb the university tower and just open fire on random strangers is never explored, but the fact that it happened, seemingly without any real provocation should be enough to make people stop and question.The reasons why Robert Smith entered a beauty college and callously slaughtered 5 people, one of them a 3 year old, are never revealed, only stating that he "wanted to get known". That is the real nature of this film. It's appeal is in its straightforwardness.The narration doesn't focus on gender or on race. There are crimes of white on black violence, just as much as black on white violence. However the undertone of how easily accessible guns are to people who obviously can't handle them and shouldn't be anywhere near them is evident throughout. The random almost inexplicable assassination of Martin Luther King who just wanted peace, to the equally bizarre assassination of Robert Kennedy by Sirhan Sirhan who claimed he didn't remember doing it.There's footage of a police officer explaining how a shotgun can easily be purchased in any store or supermarket and also footage of alleged gun reforms that just don't go far enough, so the Killing of America is predominantly about gun violence, but again it's role is not to explain why the violence exists, but the fact that it does exist and that it's almost becoming acceptable due to how commonplace it is.Yes there are a few anachronisms in the film, but these center around the use of numbers and statistics. It's unlikely that all this violence had a turning point in 1963, however one has to think that that date was chosen due to how traumatised America and most of the world was when Kennedy was assassinated, more so than ever before. Kennedy was not the first U.S president to be assassinated; Abraham Lincoln anyone?The 1960's was not the first decade of serial killings either, given that the Charles Starkweather case happened in the late 50's and Bonnie & Clyde were way back in the 30's, but the 60's seemed to be the decade where so much happened in a relatively short span of time, from race riots, excessive almost daily violence, and an ongoing war both political and actual.Overall this is a powerful film that achieves what it sets out to do. Much in the same way images of cancer are put on cigarette packs in some countries, this film is meant to be an in your face account of just how far and how fast society is sliding and continues to do so in the present day. It leaves out the psychological analysis of why and just presents the evidence as bleak as it is. If you can manage to locate a copy buy it and keep it.

Take the "Happiness is a Warm Gun" two minute shocking segment presented in "Bowling for Columbine" and multiply for almost two hours, then you have this excellent documentary named "The Killing of America". It reminds of what Michael Moore did in his powerful masterpiece, but this film haven't reach the impact of the Oscar winning documentary since it wasn't released in the U.S. back in 1982 and not even now (but it's easy to find on the internet). Leonard Schrader's film touched a deep wound of America and of course this couldn't be released in there, it would be misinterpreted and still can be depending of how one view this documentary. Strangely, this was made for the Japan market, another reason of why this wasn't shown in U.S. not even for home video.What we have here is a look at some of the most horrendous figures and crimes that ever appeared in U.S. between 1950's and 1980's, most of them captured on camera, broadcasted on TV, followed by an haunting voice over from Chuck Riley. There you'll see the Kennedy's assassination, John Lennon's murder, Jim Jones, Ted Bundy, Charles Whitman, Sirhan Sirhan, Charles Manson, Brenda Spencer and other bigger and minor criminal and tragical events recorded on film that took place in America. The intelligence of this documentary is to provoke a debate on why there was so much violent crimes in America in all the images presented here without reaching the sensationalism of things like "Faces of Death". It intrigues its viewers by exploring a dark past of one the most powerful countries of the world showing a unflattering and sad side of it. It gives us numbers, facts, informations and impressive things to make its audience think about possible reasons behind this enormous stream of crimes and violence. The images are haunting and quite depressive, but it should never be viewed as an attack to a country's past, it's just a critical piece that exposes its great arguments over a current critical situation of that period. It could happen at any place, and it happens indeed. I'm hoping to find such a brutal and honest film like this concerning the violent facts and images of my country, someday in a future until we have someone with the guts like the creators of this powerful media. 10/10