Good start, but then it gets ruined

Captivating movie !

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, Jr., and Jason Baldwin were convicted in 1994 for the murder of three boys in West Memphis, Arkansas. It's 1999 and Damien has his final appeal in front of Judge David Burnett. The popularity of the original documentary has inspired support group, Free the West Memphis Three. Cameras are no longer allowed in the court. Of the victims' family, only John Mark Byers is cooperating with the filmmakers and he has a lot to say. He also has had a lot of legal problems. His wife died in 1996. He takes a lie detector test in front of the camera. The defense team seems to be concentrating on bite marks on the boys.Byers is a big part of this follow-up. He's a very odd character and the movie is trying to make him suspicious. It's a lot of innuendos. Without being able to film the court proceedings, this is left without its main narrative. It becomes obviously one-sided. The support group adds very little to overwhelming need of this sequel. It needs to solve the murders or get the West Memphis Three out. This achieves neither. This could have been a shorter film to update the situation.

The Paradise Lost Trilogy is a great documentary series about three boys who are convicted of murder. All three films seem to be underrated but it's the second film that is the most underrated of them all. Paradise 2 is kind of like watching a train wreck happening and you can't look away. The filmmakers do a great job of showing how a persons bizarre actions and words along with rumors, insinuations and circumstantial evidence can make a person look completely guilty of something when in reality they are innocent. Really makes a person stop and think about how the three boys were convicted by a flawed criminal system.

The first film was so successful at causing doubt that a lot of restrictions were placed on this second film. Now only one parent of the murdered boys is willing to take part, no footage is allowed to be recorded in court, and the attorneys of two of the accused will not be interviewed. As such, this film has to struggle to find more things to detail, and also has less scope than the original. This film is mostly about saying that it could have been somebody else. They find reported teeth marks on one of bodies, which some experts argue aren't teeth marks and some say that they are. All this means is that how can we trust "experts" when they argue with each other. A lot of focus is placed on John Mark Byers. Here is a man that comes off as mentally unstable, has a violent and drug filled past, lies (or is at least very confused) about aspects of his life. How can you tell three different stories about how you lost your teeth? I mean really different stories. It's aggravating that somebody with such a poor grasp on reality cannot even consider the boys' innocence (I've read that now he does). His wife dies due to undetermined causes and still he is less of a subject than the three boys. Again, this film isn't about who did it, only that it may not have been these boys, and there is no real evidence to suggest that it was. I'm glad these guys are now out of jail, and hope Berlinger and others will continue their investigations to find the real killers, even if that just means finding proof that it was these boys.

Paradise lost 2 is the follow up film to the first documentary about the Robin Hood Murders. This film shows us how the convicted boys have been coping since they have been in prison and how the murdered boys parents have dealt with the past few years. This film also focuses on more evidance that these boys are not guilty and how there is growing speculation on one of the murdered boys father that he is responsible for the 3 boys deaths. Yet again the film gets far to graphic , why do we have to see pictures of the castrated murdered boy? We do have an imagination HBO, and we can use it. The father who is under suspision comes across as a horrible man who looks as if he is a mixture of a drug addict,a bible basher and inter breading but having said that most of the people we see from Arkansas look and come across as being like that. I do feel this film is heavily biased towards the convicted boys but i also feel they should never have been convicted in the first place. 8 out of 10.