ridiculous rating

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Capturing the Friedmans is about the Friedmans; an upper-middle class Jewish family in upstate New York. One day, the police come to the home of the Friedmans and search for child pornography. The police uncover a number of magazines belonging to Arnold Friedman. A retired high school teacher, he, with the help of his son Jesse, hold computer classes and piano lessons for young children. Once the police realize this, they start investigating Arnold for child abuse. Before long, he and his son are charged with around a hundred counts of sexual assault.I have a lot of fun watching documentaries; I can spend roughly two hours watching a movie on the grounds that I am learning something. Over time I've come to realize that it isn't just what the documentary is saying but how. Sometimes documentaries are clearly biased.If you are a fan of documentaries, there is a website called Documentary Heaven which has lots of documentaries you can watch for free. I remember one that was about secret government cloud seeding experiments. Cloud seeding is, more or less, controlling rainfall and weather patterns. For that documentary, there was just the director, one person that was interviewed, and only about a dozen pictures that faded in and out of the frame. Towards the end of the hour and forty-five minute snoozefest, the director comes out from behind the camera and shouts to the camera, "If he has had so much success cloud seeding, why isn't the government spending millions doing further testing!?" It detracts from the feeling that you are learning something. Instead it feels like you are spending time hearing propaganda.The only other documentary I've seen more than once was Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man (2005) and that was because I saw it for a film class. I watched it once at home and once in the class. I don't usually watch documentaries more than once because, well, hearing it once is usually enough. It's like attending a lecture more than once. You don't unless you have to. I saw Capturing the Friedmans twice so far because, again, I saw it for a class. But I will, however, most certainly be seeing it again. Capturing the Friedmans is an example of amazing storytelling.The plot thickens at every turn. With documentaries about crimes, I read them like a detective novel. You decipher the film maker's bias and then anticipate the details of the crime to make up your mind. In this case, whenever I solved the mystery, if you will, the movie would cut to another interview that threw me off.Jarecki juxtaposes interviews to create fascinating dialogs. For example, we hear from the District Attorney about the process for conducting interviews with children. He explains that the children may be frightened so one doesn't want to put words in their mouths. Instead of saying "we know he assaulted you," one should say, "what happened next?" The movie then cuts over to one of the detectives who conducted many of the interviews for the Friedman case: "We went through the whole line of questions...'We know you were in these computer classes and we know that there was a good chance he sexually assaulted you..." the camera then fades out. It's an example of how the movie can steer us toward reaching a particular conclusion. Better still, the movie can make us realize how we could never know the truth of the Friedman case. Towards the end of the movie, Jesse and his attorney provide radically different accounts of the same event. Who can we trust?A major source of information comes from the Friedman's home movies. The family shot a lot of home movies particularly around the time of the investigations. The footage provides a great balance to the interviews. Some shots from their ordinary cameras are eerily good too which add to the experience. At one point, Arnold is playing the piano and his son moves in for a close up. We listen to upbeat music (though it is made darker given the circumstance) and watch his glasses which reflect his hands on the piano keys.I highly recommend you see Capturing the Friedmans. The subject matter is solidly depressing but it is a really well done documentary.

What fascinates me most about the film is the way the way the filmmaker deftly appears to weave together officials, experts, family members and home movies and video to attempt to give a sense of truth of happened when the Father, Arnold Friedman, was arrested on various sex with minors charges. On first viewing it seemed so full of ballyhoo - what officials were saying was so different that what the family was saying (even the mother, Elaine) - That it seemed little more than a highly concocted docudrama. In fact, I dare any docudrama maker to create a story this engaging. Upon a more careful viewing it became apparent that the truth was likely not embodied in any one person's statement or perspective (Arnold died in prison before work on the film began). Perhaps the truth in some cases cannot be known and perhaps it is a mental construct of sorts. The film "captures" oh so well the dysfunction that existed within it and a power of denial strong enough to actually change reality.A landmark film.

Even though I have yet to finish watching the whole film I will write a few thoughts on where I am currently.I have tried to convince myself that this is a regular suburban family but based on the evidence and testimony that I have seen so far, I cant help but be led to believe that this may in fact be the most delinquent family I have ever seen. How can Arnies(I believe that is the main characters name) wife, after everything that was uncovered about her husband stick around after Arnie admitted to molesting children? And how can these people admit guilt in court and still try to maintain their innocence? I really cannot wrap my head around this family. The more I see the more disgusted I get. If this was not a class assignment to watch the film I would never have considered to watch it. Perhaps once I finish the movie I will have a different opinion but for right now I am dreading having to watch the rest of it.

Entertaining story, and even good film making. However, Andrew Jarecki should be ashamed of the biased point of view he MANIPULATED in this film. Is this a case of one Jewish person (Jarecki) defending a Jewish family (Friedmans)? As a new yorker myself who is not Jewish, I understand how Jewish folks stick together...But this is crossing the line and is an absolute disgrace! Jarecki left out ABSOLUTELY INCRIMINATING evidence, footage, and persons involved in this. Jesse and Arnold are without a shadow of a doubt GUILTY, and this film makes an unethical attempt to raise that doubt and draw sympathy for these predators and monsters.How dare you defend these two individuals!!! Jarecki is a FRAUD for this. There was a 3rd predator who was to testify against Jesse & Arnold about the abuse, there was an overwhelming amount of child pornography that was found (NOT A STACK OF MAGAZINES THAT JARECKI DOWNPLAYED THIS INTO). Jarecki talked to 3-5 victims out of 17 (admitted by Jesse Friedman). Jarecki left out Jesse Friedmans total admission to everything in an interview from jail with Geraldo Rivera as well. You can check it out for yourself, but don't for a minute let Jarecki fool you that these monsters are anything but sick, sick individuals who destroyed dozens of lives. Here is a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjYWOZgMbHQ&feature=related