The Thin Blue Line (1988)

Directed by: Errol Morris

****

Morris' visual style in The Thin Blue Line is unlike any conventional documentary approach. Although his interviews are shot straight on, head and shoulders, there is a way his camera has of framing his subjects so that we look at them very carefully, learning as much by what we see as by what we hear. The words of Roger Ebert describe this film better than I can try to do but my using his quote goes beyond my brain's laziness. The intensity brought forth through the interviews, and really, the only documentary aspect of this film, resonates after seeing it. There's nothing too frightening about these characters but reading Ebert's review just minutes after watching this film made me realize how much I kept trying to look harder at these people, wanting to learn more about what made them tick, wanting to hear more than what they were saying.

Some time ago, I watched a Charlie Rose interview with Charles Manson. Manson's crazy is evident and that creates an intensity that resonates even after watching the interview. Just hearing his views on the world make you think about your own and wonder how they can be so different (or the same, muahaha! - just kidding). The Thin Blue Line gives us interviews with characters who are much more like ourselves than Charles Manson, but the gravity of the situation about which they speak and who they are and why they do things really makes you want to look deep into their eyes and see their soul.

The Thin Blue Line is a documentary that's been starring back at me from my instant Netflix que for a while now. I've heard little bits about it and my always mistaking it for a prequal to Terrance Malik's war film always had me this close to giving it a watch. Finally sitting down to do so, brought with it, somewhat high expectations. Frustration lessened those expectations as there are aspects of this film, especially at the beginning that are kind of confusing. However, its really only getting a grasp on who's who. Once that's nailed down, its a relatively simple film to follow. Randall Adams is one of Morris' two primary subjects for interviews. Adams is the one that this film all but proves innocent of a crime for which he is serving a life sentence. David Harris is the man who probably committed the crime. He too is in prison, on death row for an unrelated murder.

The film teaters on the injustices of the Dallas court system during Adams trial but its more about people. Its about ordinary people mixed up in a real situation. Its not an extraordinary situation by most accounts... the idea that Morris we now know came within days of being executed before being exonerated after this film's release, is extraordinary but really we are fed a court case that convicted a man based on the facts that it had. Whether or not those facts were true or reliable remains to be seen. There are times when Morris suggests that the court system is corrupt and looking for a hard conviction for a cop killer. He points out that the District Attourney wanted a 28-year old man (Adams) so he could give him the death sentence rather than a 16-year old (Harris) who might get some juvenille detention time. Either way, this film stays away from biased opinions and really just feeds you the facts from every angle.

Interviews and photographs are mixed together with somewhat lazy but important reanactments of the murder. We see Dallas Police Officer Robert Woods approach the car and then five shots fired at him and we see this from every possible angle. Some of which give you a better idea of who is responsible, none of which convince you beyond a reasonable doubt. There are aspects of his filmmaking that appear as if a student was behind the camera and there are others that look a little bit too eighties to feel real but as a whole, the dramatizations were effective. However, for that effectiveness, I give more credit to Philip Glass' chilling score. I've yet to read anything about this film that leaves Glass unmentioned and I won't either. Documentaries so often inform, occasionally entertain, but seldom do they create a mood for themselves. Glass' music compliments the intensity of Morris' subject matter.

Perhaps Morris' film aided in the exoneration of an innocent man but I think it also gave an example of how a documentary can be done. No where does it say a documentary can't be creative. Well, I guess that's not true as the film was unable to contend for a best Documentary Oscar since it had fictional scenes. Either way, the creativity that Morris blends with the real drama that are these people's lives is compelling enough for at least one viewing... but possible a few.