Watch The Last Resort

The Last Resort

The Last Resort is a movie starring Edna Buchanan, Susan Gladstone, and Stan Hughes. An uncannily revealing portrait of American photographers Andy Sweet and Gary Monroe and the vibrant community of Jewish retirees they obsessively...

Running Time
1 hours 10 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Documentary, History
Dennis Scholl, Kareem Tabsch
Edna Buchanan, Susan Gladstone, Stan Hughes, Mitchell Kaplan
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

An uncannily revealing portrait of American photographers Andy Sweet and Gary Monroe and the vibrant community of Jewish retirees they obsessively focused their camera's lens on in the sunburned paradise of 1970s Miami Beach.

Comments about documentary «The Last Resort» (32)

Matthew photo

I liked this movie and am glad to see some truly great, 'emotional' pictures for this time in our history. I have read many of the comments on this site and it seems to me that a lot of people are not really clear about what this movie is. They are confused about the difference between 'American History X' and 'Humanity'. They cannot agree, so they try to 'edit' the film to make it make sense. The difference between the two is not just that a film must be true in its story but also should tell a good story about its subject. The American History X film is a good film. But it is not 'emotional' enough for me. Humanity is not only an American film, it is a film for all Americans, a film for all Americans. We all have a responsibility to tell the truth about our history and that is what this film is about. Now, back to the movie, I would recommend it to anyone who wants to learn more about the difference between American History X and 'Humanity'. Hopefully, we can all agree on the differences between the two.

Jeffrey Myers photo
Jeffrey Myers

I'm going to preface this by saying that the movie was very poorly made. The set up is never clear and the story is awful. However, at the end of the movie, I was very impressed with this movie. The director nailed the style, setting, and plot. It was like watching a documentary on the topic. Overall, I recommend it. The movie is not perfect, but it was very good. The movie also makes the point that the oil corporations have not helped the middle-class with jobs and the people that they have helped are only hurting themselves. I give this movie a 7 out of 10.

Alan H. photo
Alan H.

This documentary is the second of three planned "telethons" about the history and present day torture and imprisonment of the Japanese in World War II. The first telethon will be broadcast on The History Channel tonight, followed by the second at 8pm Eastern tonight. I have been reading comments from people who thought this documentary was boring and the stories too familiar and they also reported that the movie was not very well done. I agree. I just wanted to say that I think the reason this film is so popular is that it is so much different from the normal Hollywood movie. It is extremely dark and many people have probably never heard of it or of the Japanese. I think it has been quite a while since I have seen a movie that truly moved me. I would recommend it for anyone who loves history, war, film, and definitely war movies in general.

Amanda photo

If you have ever viewed the classic "Mona Lisa Smile" film, you'll find this movie's lead to be a lot like that film. It's like watching a hard to watch movie, in the end you'll come out really impressed. Anyway, I feel this movie did a great job portraying how the country's reputation was really changed after the assassination. The story revolves around the roles of the FBI and CIA, who were involved in the early stages of the investigation, as well as the changing opinion of the American people, which was really a tragedy. Finally, I feel that the movie painted a very accurate picture of what happened, and how this scandal affected the country's reputation. All in all, I feel this movie is a must-see, if you're a history buff or you're a JFK fan. It's a must-see movie. I recommend it. *

Samuel photo

Watched it at a film festival in Denmark, and what a experience. I am a film buff, and I know the Oscar-winning work of almost everyone in the film industry. This one certainly doesn't deserve the Oscar it was given. However, the most impressive thing about it is how it has been so over looked by so many critics. I know I would not have seen it otherwise. The Oscar was definitely deserved. All of the actors, who are all very credible, are superb. I have never seen a film this "dark" or this "dark" and I have never seen a film of this calibre that I did not enjoy.

Robert J. photo
Robert J.

This is not the best film I've seen, not even close. This film is full of arguments, with some people arguing that the Northern Ireland peace process was a sham. I won't say this is a sham, but it isn't the peace process. I will say that if the film was the peace process, it would be the greatest thing that has ever happened. The peace process is supposed to be the reason why the Union could exist, not that this film is saying that. It is a great film, one that makes a good argument for the peace process, but it isn't the cause of the peace process. To me it is a film that made a great argument, but didn't present the cause. I found this film to be interesting, but not the best.

Aaron E. photo
Aaron E.

This was a documentary on the situation in Laos, and how it was really a war against the enemy, rather than just an attempt to get the other side to leave Laos. My impression from the narration was that this was a "westernized" version of the story, since the war was in Thailand. I think they did a good job of presenting the history of the war, including the actions of the Americans, and the Vietnamese who helped with the war. I liked the way they presented the story of the Americans in Laos, since that is an important part of the story. The Vietnamese were a bit annoying, in my opinion. I think they could have done a better job of presenting the Vietnamese in Laos, but overall, it was a good documentary. The narration was good, the director did a good job. I also liked the way the director showed the history of the wars, and how the war affected many countries, as well as how the Americans brought attention to the war. I think that was a very good documentary, and one I would recommend to people. I give it a 7/10.

Denise photo

This is the most spectacular film I have seen since John Ford's "The Outlaw". Not since the great Southern Gothic films of the 20th century has a film so set in the deep South hit me as powerfully as "The Last Resort". In this film, we see the heroes of the 19th century Confederate States fighting for freedom and its purpose. This is a wonderfully entertaining story. The director, Andrew Niccol, tells this story from the point of view of Confederate General William Tecumseh Sherman. This is his final battle. However, the film is an emotional look into the human condition. Sherman has had a difficult life. He lost his wife, a son, and his left hand. This causes him to become bitter and angry. He is determined to achieve the impossible: the Union should not be defeated in the Civil War. The movie is a heroic coming to terms with defeat. We witness Sherman's need to be able to "fit back into his skin", his hatred of the south, and his remorse for the loss of his wife and child. He can no longer sit by and watch his land and people suffer. His once heroic comrades have lost their way and are willing to die for nothing. The first half of the film focuses on Sherman's wife and son. Then the film shifts to him as he battles his remaining comrades. A moving film that will remain in my memory for a long time. A must see!

Jason T. photo
Jason T.

What I liked most about this documentary is that it is all about what people wanted to see. It is not a rant against the communists, nor is it a revolutionary vanguardist movement film. It is not even about the Egyptian revolution, which was far more important and had far more resources than the Russian. The only real revelation in this film is the idea that if we had not spoken up in the first place, history would have been much different. We should be grateful that we did speak up in the first place. Overall, the film is a great insight into the American mentality that has shaped American culture and has led to some of the most important events in our history.

Terry Barrett photo
Terry Barrett

This film on the holocaust is really great. And after the opening, the documentary starts, and you will be wishing you have never heard of the holocaust, since this is really interesting and gives you a better understanding of what happened. Of course, the movie is biased towards the European side of the story, and it is a great look at the events that happened before and after the war. All in all, it is a great film. The footage from the holocaust was amazing, and it made me wonder, when would the world be like today? I really hope this is the only film that focuses on the holocaust.

Virginia Simmons photo
Virginia Simmons

As the great Harold Pinter famously stated, "A film is a snapshot of the time. A history is a picture of that time." James Cameron, director of Avatar and The Abyss, made a remarkable documentary film that looks back at the way film has changed over the years from the earliest days of film in the 20th century, to the more popular era of the 30's. Cameron films are often viewed as a precursor of the blockbuster genre. We're used to a hero and a villain, a good guy and bad guy, a hero and a villain, a hero and a bad guy. Cameron shows the change of movies from the 30's to the 1960's. It's interesting that he also covers a time when films were marketed as a 24 hour a day affair. And they weren't. The first hour of the film, while you're sitting in your living room, watching James Cameron talk about the film, you could be doing something else. You could be doing the laundry. You could be shopping for groceries. Cameron has a quiet, thoughtful voice that will warm your heart. However, I thought the documentary was a bit too slow and not a very good documentary. There are very few famous people mentioned in the documentary. And to tell the truth, I don't really think it matters. The best part of the documentary is the very last part. It is a surreal, and almost surrealistic look at what movies can and can't be. In a way it feels like a documentary version of a movie. It will go along with the style of the movie, but it's still a funny, and very entertaining look at how movies have changed. If you liked Avatar, then you'll enjoy this one.

James photo

This movie, directed by Tom Hanks and Tom Hanks and written by Hanks and Hanks, is an investigation of the shooting of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. The movie focuses on the attempts of the State Department to find out who was responsible for the attack, and how they got out of the situation and what they did to try to protect the ambassador. The movie is a good look at the events of September 11, and the incident itself. The movie is not perfect, but the truth comes out and is well told. The movie is very well made, and the actors are good. The movie is worth seeing, and I would highly recommend it to anyone who has ever been in an embassy or consulate. I give this movie 7/10.

Gerald Garrett photo
Gerald Garrett

Although I think the movie is a good one, I don't understand how this movie can get such a high rating. I mean, the movie is about the destruction of the world, and the death of millions of people. But the last 30 minutes is completely irrelevant to the story. It's like the movie is trying to give a message about the death of the world, but it doesn't work. I don't know if the movie is trying to tell us the message, but it doesn't work. Also, there are some things that are not explained at all. It's like they are trying to hide something. If they had explained everything, the movie would be much better. So, if you want to know more about the movie, watch the movie, but don't expect anything that would make you think that the movie is really good. I give the movie 7/10.

Harold J. photo
Harold J.

I really enjoy this documentary. It gives you an understanding of the politics of the Spanish Civil War. I think it was a very well done documentary and the way it was filmed was interesting. I really enjoyed the way the director went into the events in the film and that it was really interesting to see the people's reactions to the events in the film. I think the director did a great job in making sure that the director did not focus too much on the subject matter. The director focused more on the background of the director and the people he was interviewing. I think it was a great documentary and I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in the Spanish Civil War. I think it was very well done and I would definitely recommend it to anyone who likes documentaries.

Amanda Evans photo
Amanda Evans

Peter Scully is a very experienced and knowledgeable tourist guide, based in Melbourne, who takes us to the (almost) untouched wilderness around the Great Barrier Reef. Unfortunately, his boat, along with most of the tourists, gets caught in a storm, and the entire crew of twenty-five is lost and presumed dead. Not one to be deterred by this discovery, Scully decides to continue his tour, to see what remains of the crew. He is joined by photographer Phil Taggart, a keen bushwalker, who guides him along the way. This is a fascinating and important documentary which covers aspects of both national park tourism and the perception of Australia in the early 21st century. There is no scene which is not worth the time, and the time spent is well spent.

Olivia photo

With this film, the Chief of Army Staff General Martin Dempsey announces that he is creating an all-male special unit to be formed by the Army's top officers as "The Battle Group". The unit is to be trained and equipped to a "T" (being a "T" means you are trained as a male. There are currently 17 special operations troops in the US Special Operations Command. This unit was set up in Iraq in 2005, and as of 2006, no more troops are being added. The unit's existence is set up as a means of allowing some men (not all, and not all experienced) to go to Iraq, train and fight alongside their female counterparts. This is also a "T" for a training program. The idea is that women will not be harmed, or so the reasoning goes. This film doesn't delve into the specifics of the operation, and therefore the show has a sort of "opinion" piece element. However, from the movie's perspective, the unit's existence was met with dismay from many on the ground. The film's opening on the May 2004 deployment of Iraqi Special Forces in Anbar province is a very good representation of a male-dominated military environment, which does not support women soldiers and is not representative of the situation in Iraq at large. In Iraq, all men have a standard male physique, and their power and male dominance is the standard. Women are not allowed to fight in a lot of the units that they serve in. I did not understand why. The unit is advertised as being "female friendly," yet they fight with all the male men. The unit's training is not what you would expect from a military unit. It is extremely rare for women to actually be trained in combat. In a lot of cases, the female officers train them to be non-violent (or even to be more lenient) and not to use force, and then when the men are given their orders, they do not follow them. In some cases the women only meet men to have an "intimate relationship" with them and the men do not like it at all. The women are trained for combat, but are not asked to "step into combat." In some cases women are treated more leniently than the men. The unit's commander is very frustrated at the very thought of women in combat. In other words, he is extremely racist, sexist, and racist against women. The film is also racist, sexist, and racist against some black men. The unit is not trained to be equal to any other unit in the world. Instead, the men are trained to have a "t" (a "T" means you are trained as a male). The unit has a white male in the leadership position and a black female. There are also black men and women in leadership positions, but not white men. The unit also has a black female in the ranking position, but not in leadership positions. In other words, the unit has a history of being racist against black men, and not training women. The movie is very well done, and does a good job of portraying the attitude of a military male.

James photo

It is very rare that I do not have an opinion about a documentary. Yet it is also rare that I actually feel compelled to write a comment about a documentary. For some reason, The Last Resort was a great documentary. The subject matter is complicated, the camera work and lighting are brilliant, and the story is pretty much flawless. There is one thing I did not like about the film: the excessive use of subtitles. The subtitles were very distracting and on many occasions almost completely inaudible. The subtitles also seemed very unnecessary, as the main story was told without them. Even a fairly easy to understand story would have been better served without them. The film has an interesting, insightful, and entertaining style that does not detract from the story. The production value of the film is impressive. In particular, the choice of music and camera work is really well done. I also liked the fact that the film clearly marked the history of the relationship between the US and Cuba. The film does a great job of showing how the relationship has changed over time, and highlights some interesting historical events. It also gave me a better understanding of what the Cuban Revolution was all about. While the story was fascinating, the ending was somewhat disappointing. The final battle scenes were well done, and I enjoyed the final scenes. However, they were very short and did not really complete the film. However, there was a lot of emotion, and I think that the audience would have appreciated that. Overall, I liked the film. While it was not the best documentary I have ever seen, I am still glad I watched it. It is a great film and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in Cuban politics. I do not think it is a great film and the final battle scenes do not really fill the movie, but that's just me.

Diane Henderson photo
Diane Henderson

I have always loved James Cameron movies. All his other films are incredible, from the Aliens, Aliens 2, The Abyss, Terminator 2, and Titanic to the Avatar series. His work has been great and I think the themes in his work are always great. However, there is a problem with his movies. He likes to make movies for children, but the vast majority of his movies are pretty adult-oriented. I am not saying that they are bad or anything, but for an adult, I am not sure that they are worth the effort. Even with the aliens theme being one of my favorites, I have to say that I really don't like Avatar. It had a good story and great animation. But it was way to slow and I was bored for the majority of it. Also, the main problem was that it was more of a family movie than a movie that really required an adult to sit through. The Last Resort, in comparison, had some pretty good visuals, but didn't have much of a story. I also really wasn't sure how this would tie into the rest of the Avatar series, but it did. The main problem with the film is the same problem with all the other Avatar films. It was just too slow. If you like Avatar, this is one of the better films you will see, but I don't think you will enjoy it as much as I did.

George photo

If you like science, you'll love this movie. The documentary that is presented in a very slow and more sober manner gives the viewer a different point of view from what you'd normally get from a movie about the "Superstition" and its effects on the lives of many people. There is also plenty of scientific fact to back up the scientific points. In fact, this documentary is very scientific as far as it goes. However, it does show the obvious that scientists can make mistakes as well. Also, it's made clear that scientists have a tendency to do some questionable things. So, I would strongly recommend this documentary for anyone who likes to understand the subject matter. And, it's just a movie, so there's no real graphic violence. But, if you like science, you'll definitely enjoy it.

Thomas photo

Sometimes a documentary can be challenging. A challenge to the audience, a challenge to the filmmakers, a challenge to themselves. And that's exactly what this film is. It's a challenge to us, the audience, and we must stand up and question ourselves about what we've been told in film class. The film begins by showing us the story of an IRA sniper who was shot in the head while taking a captured British soldier prisoner. He was sent to a British prison camp in France after being accused of cowardice. The British government were hell bent on killing him and even used a brainwashing device on him to tell him he'd been wronged by the British, that they were not willing to kill any innocent soldiers. This was done to keep the morale of the IRA high. They failed. The sniper was taken back to England where he was brutally beaten to death by British soldiers. The film then starts with a man who was sentenced to death by beheading for the murders he committed. He is brought before a judge, who is warned that he will be executed if he doesn't admit guilt. The man, from Ireland, is ready to confess and we find out that his lawyers have helped him avoid a death sentence by pleading guilty to manslaughter. The judge was trying to avoid a death sentence, but this is one of the most infamous cases of the death penalty in history, and he's planning on executing the man anyway. The film then goes on to show us a woman who was convicted of murder for helping her boyfriend kill a British soldier. She was sentenced to death, but it was later overturned and she was allowed to keep her life sentence. The film then ends by telling us about a man who was prosecuted for the murder of a British soldier. He was found guilty and he was sentenced to death. After the film was finished we were all left in disbelief that something like that could ever happen in the UK. There's a great scene that shows the British officer who brought the sniper to the British prison camp being asked about how he managed to get into this prison camp. He didn't have a passport, he didn't have any money. He wasn't a bad guy, he was just following the orders of his superiors. All of this was made to show us that the British government was just incredibly bad. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The filmmakers go on to show us some of the terrible things that were done to IRA prisoners after they'd been captured, including the use of dogs, humiliation, being beaten to death and being forced to drink urine. At the end of the film, we're shown pictures of the British prison camp, where the sniper was eventually executed. Some of the prisoners were shot to death by British soldiers after they were captured, but it is to be expected that they'd be killed eventually. This film is extremely hard to watch. It's difficult to watch the cruel acts of torture and degradation done to people who were already suffering under the British government. The film is also very disturbing to watch, because we are seeing the brutal truth of British war crimes. The film is also very emotional, because it shows us the atrocities that were being committed against the people of Ireland. The film is also highly moral, because it shows us how the British treated the people of Ireland, treating them like objects and treating them like nothing.

Brittany Peterson photo
Brittany Peterson

This documentary traces the history of the NLWU, and why the violence of the years that followed the strike would eventually turn to the GOP. The most interesting part of the film is the history of how the NLWU was created. Its a very interesting study on what happens when a labor union is formed. Throughout the film, we hear from various people about the origins of the union and what it meant to the people that it represented. We also hear from various people about the reasons why the strike was held and about the reasons why they wanted to strike. If you're not interested in the history of the NLWU, this is not the documentary for you. You'll be just as interested in the politics of the party as I was. But if you are interested in how the NLWU was formed, or know a lot about the history of labor unions in the U.S., you'll find this film interesting and well worth watching. This documentary is so well made, the subjects of the interviews are so well done, and the overall presentation is so well done, it's almost worth the time spent watching it. It will probably be one of the most interesting documentaries I've ever watched, and I hope I'll be able to find the DVD of it someday. 8/10

Edward Perkins photo
Edward Perkins

For a documentary, it is a fairly sparse and at times very understated presentation. For the life of me, I still don't understand why they chose to turn the film into a "must see" documentary. I think it was to convey a message about the rise of Islamic Terrorism and that we, as Americans, were all alike in our reactions. If you have never been in a war, as I have, you may not understand the sheer terror that these people are experiencing. As for the wars we are currently in, or will be in the next decade, I believe that we are living in the worst era to have ever seen. For me, I am just as appalled by this film as I am by the current state of affairs. What more can be said about the true nature of our world? What more can be said about our immediate future? Would it not be better for us all if we just reflect and try to understand the current situation? If we had that attitude towards our immediate future, we would be all better off for it. Perhaps I'm just a prude. Perhaps I'm not up to the challenge of this topic. I still haven't decided. But I am all in favor of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is not being a hypocrite, or being a militant, or being an extremist. Freedom of speech is the ability to freely express yourself. I'm not really sure what is most wrong with Islam. The Jews are the most vocal and have the most to lose. The Muslims are at the mercy of their self-righteousness, their fear, and their lack of education. As for the present state of the world, I think we all have a responsibility to do something about it. We, as humans, are all interconnected and can be very culpable for one another's actions. There is a reason we are called "the most moral people in the world." I believe it's because our own selfishness in the face of the world's problems has created some of the greatest problems and tragedies of the past. If we are to avoid a return to the tyranny of ancient times, then we should do everything we can to avoid repeating that time and history. I think this documentary, while flawed, was worthwhile. I also don't think it was intended to be very powerful. I just think it was a good attempt to help people realize the reality of what is happening today. I think that we are all well aware that we all have our own self-interests. Sometimes, they are to the detriment of others. If you want to know more about the Islamic Terrorism, or if you want to learn how to identify a potential terrorist, this documentary is for you. Just don't expect too much from it.

Lauren P. photo
Lauren P.

You know it's not going to be the most inspiring documentary you've ever seen. Yet, somehow, the film succeeds to surprise you with the main character's life and the people in his life. It is a painful story to watch. but it has its own charm and makes you to focus on the great story behind it. It is amazing that the interviewer didn't win an Oscar but that's not important.

Arthur B. photo
Arthur B.

The Last Resort is a documentary about the risk of climate change and how to mitigate its consequences. The film follows six participants of a presentation in Paris on how to cope with the threat of climate change. The presentation is by French Professor Pierre Fortin and French political scientist Catherine Haddad who call for action now. The film includes interviews with scientists, social workers and others from the three countries involved in the talks. The United Nations has developed a set of guidelines for countries to adopt to the Paris Agreement which is being finalised in March this year. The guidelines have three parts. The first is a priority list of action to be undertaken by countries. The second is a review of the three mitigation strategies, which includes measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the third is the 'common but differentiated responsibilities' portion of the Paris Agreement which sets out specific measures to be taken by each country to reduce emissions. If the third part is not enough, then the countries may be expected to set up a working group and work towards common but differentiated responsibilities. The Last Resort features prominent academics from the United States, France, Germany and the European Union. It also features a former head of the International Energy Agency, Jonathan Overpeck. The team interviewed some experts from the governments of Australia, Japan, Russia and the United States. It included representatives from the oil and gas industries, coal companies, climate action charities, the US military and environmental NGOs. All of the countries involved are represented in the film. The Last Resort is a good documentary for those who want to understand the risk of climate change and how to reduce it. This is a good documentary that will stimulate debate on the risks of climate change and its mitigation strategies. It also has some useful information on how to cope with climate change. However, there is no point in comparing it to the UN's guidelines because the guidelines are more extensive and the research and discussions in this film are more extensive. The Last Resort is an interesting documentary about climate change. It is well produced and has good information. The footage is not over the top. There is no advertising in the film and the footage is clear and clear. Overall, the information in the film is important and the research and discussions are valuable.

Johnny photo

While I love Sean Penn's work, I think this documentary deserved more credit. Penn has become known for his roles in historical films. While "The Last Resort" is historical in nature, Penn is not portraying the actual experience of the Holy Land. He is simply a journalist who is trying to find out what he can from the documentation he has collected. This documentary does a good job of showing that the information is from the context and source of the people being interviewed, rather than Penn's own personal account. I think Penn did a very good job of making the documentary as much of a personal story as possible. He has been through a lot in his career, and he certainly does not want to be a war hero. He is just as interested in the history behind the people of the Holy Land, the lessons that the city has learned, and the ideas about what they should be doing to help their people. While the documentary does not paint Israel in a negative light, there is still plenty of conflict between people and the government. It does show what it was like to be in the Palestinian Authority, especially the leadership of President Abbas. The documentary does not paint Israel in a negative light. On the contrary, there is an appeal to the citizens of Israel. I like this documentary a lot.

Teresa J. photo
Teresa J.

A good documentary, but one has to see it to be sure of this statement. The film on the Nazi party is worth watching and a whole lot of background on what brought them together and how that brought them together is in the film. The film on the period of time it was shot in, is valuable too, and shows a small window into the personal and organizational history of the party and it's rise to power. The film on the rise of Hitler to power is interesting and moving as is the discussion of the war and the atrocities. The film does not go into the planning of the war, but shows how the Nazis view it and has some insight to their psychological motivations. This film is not really a historical documentary, but is more a documentary on the rise of Nazi Germany and the fear that they felt about it. The film can be seen as an inside view of the party and its rise to power, and how it turned into a Nazi Party with its racist, fascist, and antisemitic views and philosophy. The film does not explain it's ideologies but has a good argument for how the Nazi Party was involved in a rise to power. This film gives a decent and decent presentation of a subject and shows it in a good manner. It is not a film that I would buy on DVD, but it is a film that I would recommend, because it is good.

Robert Wheeler photo
Robert Wheeler

This film by Donald Kessler seems to be the best film I have seen this year. It gives an in-depth look into the civil war in South Vietnam. It is a fascinating subject and its place in history. The movie's director-turned-screenwriter (and "actor" as he put it) has written some very detailed essays on the film. But I wanted to read about the film first. Donald Kessler seems to have a flair for writing about the Vietnam War and the conflict in general. This film is an excellent "documentary" on a subject that has been heavily covered. I wish we could see more movies like this. I found this film extremely educational. I felt like I learned a lot and was very interested in the film. I thought the film was about Vietnam but really it was about the civil war in the South. I also enjoyed the other movies and the music in the film. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who is a historian, a student of the Civil War or a fan of any of the artists or actors in this film. I don't think anyone will find this movie dull or boring. I give this film a 7 out of 10.

Victoria Dixon photo
Victoria Dixon

When the end of the war in Iraq approaches, American forces are being pulled out of Iraq. While there is talk of another ground war, most of the troops have been redeployed to the states. This documentary is about the psychological toll this is taking on the soldiers and the civilians caught in the middle. It's a gripping and very well-made documentary that shows the struggles of the soldiers and the civilians caught in the middle. It's a sobering and depressing look at the situation. It's also a reminder of the lengths that we will go to in order to keep our country safe. There are many scenes that show the difficulty that the troops are having to live with. The only positive thing that I can say is that it does show the people on the ground are getting along. It is a depressing and grim documentary that will likely be a talking point for years to come. The documentary is very well made and the interviewees are very interesting. I think that this is the best documentary I have ever seen about the war in Iraq. I highly recommend it.

Karen C. photo
Karen C.

It's an interesting topic to cover, and it's clear that this documentary is well-done and well-constructed. It's hard to say whether it's a bit too documentary for its own good, and it doesn't really know what it wants to be. The problem is that it's not really a documentary. The "documentary" bits are poorly edited and contrived. It's hard to tell whether it's a film about a family or an advocacy group. The subjects are fascinating, but they don't really seem to want to be interviewed. The story is somewhat interesting, but it's never very clear. And there's no real direction, because the film doesn't seem to know where it's going. It's not clear whether this is supposed to be a critique of the American legal system or an indictment of the Bush administration. It's certainly not clear whether the people interviewed are being fair or biased. There's some good documentary-making, but it's not a very good documentary. It's a bit like a documentary about the Rwandan genocide. It's very difficult to watch, but it's worth watching if you like this sort of thing. But you shouldn't watch it if you want to be challenged.

Wayne Burns photo
Wayne Burns

I saw this movie at a screening in Cleveland and it was a very good movie. I thought the images were very effective and made the movie a very good movie. I also enjoyed the fact that the movie took place in the 1950's, and in the 1950's, there were no computers or digital cameras. So many of the images were just plain old film and the sound was great. So many of the images were not new, and they were quite realistic. I thought the movie was very effective because of the techniques used to make the images. The movie was about the people who were involved in the underground railroad. I thought that the movie was very effective and I would definitely recommend this movie. I would also like to say that I think this movie is very effective because of the fact that it shows the fact that the underground railroad was a very important part of the American economy and of the world economy, and that this was an important part of the American economy. It was a very important part of the economy, and I think it's a very good movie because it is a very good movie. It is an effective movie and I would definitely recommend it.

Denise C. photo
Denise C.

This is a documentary about the memory of the Russian people who fought in World War II. It gives a lot of information about the veterans and their families. The stories of the soldiers are very moving. But I found the film to be too slow and it was a bit boring. In my opinion, the history of the Russian people is more interesting than the story of the soldiers.

Samuel photo

I was always a fan of this documentary series. I was a bit disappointed with the show due to the number of subjects, but this documentary was a great addition to the series. The main subject of this documentary was the last three days of the 9/11 attacks. This documentary takes us through the events, with interviews from the survivors, who were lucky to survive the attack. One of the biggest problems with this documentary was the audio quality. The audio quality was so bad that it was difficult to hear the survivors and the news reporters. It was the most difficult aspect of this documentary to watch because the audio was so bad. This was the biggest flaw with the film. Overall, this documentary was a great addition to the series, and I highly recommend it.