This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Every viral video or sensational clip that receives airplay or notoriety has a backstory, and Honest Man: The Life of R. Budd Dwyer is a documentary that works to add context to one of the most famous suicides ever captured on video. On January 22, 1987, Pennsylvania Treasurer R. Budd Dwyer, after being found guilty of accepting bribes from a Californian accounting firm, called a press conference before numerous officials and journalists. He was presumably going to announce his resignation, as his sentencing was scheduled to take place the next day. Following a four minute speech about his wife, kids, his innocence, and his legacy as Treasurer, Dwyer pulled a .357 revolver from a manila envelope, pointed it in his mouth, and shot himself, dropping dead instantly having broadcast his suicide to numerous Television stations.One of the most tragic things about Dwyer's case is that what he did, or allegedly did, while in office, is something that is more-or-less legal in state and federal government today. Accepting bribes, or "political donations," isn't uncommon and since the dawn of Citizens United, is something that special interest groups and lobbyists have been doing in excess. Honest Man works to tell Dwyer's side of the story, which has been shortchanged to the extreme act itself.Dwyer's wife, children, and colleagues all appear in the documentary and recount his life and the case that eventually engulfed his life. Dwyer studied political science and accounting in college, eventually running for the general assembly when he graduated. Roy Wilt, a colleague and a legislator, comments how politics was who Budd was and how it took over his life as soon as he began running for the assembly. He goes on to say how Budd would never look at the donators who graciously gave money to his campaign, nor could he ever bring himself to ask for money. While intelligent and crafty, he was extraordinarily humble, especially for a politician.Controversy began to plague his career once he became Pennsylvania's state Treasurer. When Dwyer wouldn't approve of state Governor Dick Thornburgh's wife's plane ticket as a business expenditure, he saw himself on the oust with the Governor. Right then and there, from the perspective of some, Dwyer seemed stubborn as a mule and somebody who was willing to fight over the smallest circumstances. Following this, Pennsylvania discovered that its state workers had grossly overpaid in their federal taxes because of the state withholding funds. This, in turn, led to dozens of accounting firms vying for a multimillion-dollar settlement contract in order to compensate each employee for the amount they overpaid. In 1986, Dwyer allegedly received a bribe from a California accounting firm that was trying to obtain the lofty contract, to which he plead not guilty to, wouldn't agree to a plea bargain, and stood trial in the case.The main witness to Dwyer's act of taking the bribe, William Smith, even admits to lying under oath in the documentary, saying Dwyer took the bribe during a false testimony. Smith admits here that he is, as a result, responsible for Dwyer's subsequent suicide.Dwyer's charisma and almost blue-collar, everyman charm is seen through each piece of archival footage shown in the documentary. He was a man of many commonalities, who in and of himself, didn't seem to have any interest in unethical dealings. During his famous final press conference, it was almost as if Dwyer couldn't believe he was in this situation; he seemed shocked, almost like a deer in headlights, as if he had no idea how he found himself in this situation and was more-or-less forced into it.The death of Dwyer is one of the most bizarre but saddening political tragedies I have yet to read of, and Honest Man does a solid job at detailing it. It's a case that found itself captured in a whirlwind of hearsay and miscalculation that led to the death of an arguably innocent man. Dwyer's surviving children explain in the film not only their reactions to their father's suicide at the time, but how, despite the suicide video's ubiquitous presence online, this kind of thing could happen again. Dwyer's widow, Joanne Dwyer, who died a year before the release of this film, nicely states how we live in a society obsessed with violence, and in this case, violence without much regard to context or history. Both her and her children state how the impact of Dwyer as a political figure and his legacy have, as a result, taken a backseat to the sensationalism and act of his suicide. They're not wrong, and it's depressing to see a story where a sympathetic, and quite possibly innocent, politician has fallen on deaf ears in present time.Directed by: James Dirschberger.

If the purpose of a documentary is to enlighten via the presentation of unbiased facts than surely james dirschberger's 'honest man : the life of r budd dwyer' is the ultimate anti-documentary.From the choice of interviewees (family members,ex colleagues),reluctance to even acknowledge or go into detail about the incriminating evidence against him and finally the completely partisan title of the finished product,you should be in no doubt what conclusions the film's makers want to you to draw about the case.Having had no preconceptions regarding dwyer's guilt or innocence going into watching this (i was merely interested in the story),i was disappointed by the bull in a china shop approach to proving his innocence. Imagine if 'capturing the friedman's' andrew jarecki's superlative documentary about the friedman abuse case took this same approach from the get go,then we'd have missed out on all the rich insight and thought provoking evidence for and against the accused that the director gleaned from both the interviews and the evidence he had procured and would have been left with a glorified celluloid character reference instead. As such 'honest man' is a massively dispiriting misfire that will surely only appeal to those who want quick and easy answers and wont question from whence they came.

I just finished the film and was taken by how one sided it turned out to be. At least half of the film covers his past. It plays out more like a tribute to the main character - Budd Dwyer.The film is composed entirely of interviews and news casts. Headlines and partially highlighted newspaper articles are repeatedly shown. The selection of people interviewed and the amount of air time they are given all create bias towards Dwyer.One example is the the appointment of a federal prosecutor. The film has someone interviewed stating that the "Democratic governor" had a role in his appointment. That is far from being true as it was a federal crime. The president at the time was Ronald Reagan who was also head of the Republican party. The Attorney General of the US is appointed by the president and he in turn assigns federal prosecutors. The "documentary" tries to make it seem that the Democratic governor who felt wronged by Dwyer was out for vengeance.Another example of biasness is when the film shows the man who gave Dwyer the bribe money. William Smith, the district Republican chief, states in one scene of the film he was surprised that Dwyer accepted the money when he offered it to him. This would seem to indicate he knew it was bribe money. The film then tries to show he lied at Dwyer's trial because he was offered a plea bargain. One scene lasts three seconds and the other 4 minutes. Be very careful while watching as you may miss items as they are being glossed over by the filmmakers. Afterwards think about all you have seen and make your own decision regarding the case.The interviews with Dwyer's son unwittingly show how he failed as a father. His son is not a very nice or compassionate man. The film spends far too much time interviewing Bud Dwyer's friends and family. It does not spend enough time combing through the case which led to his conviction.The "documentary" did not do a very good job when explaining the charges against Dwyer. Instead it quickly introduced the evidence and witnesses then spent more time trying to demean them. It's as if the filmmakers felt only the headlines and a few quips were sufficient. I took issue with this and realized how poorly done the film had become.I enjoy watching documentaries and exploring issues in an unbiased manner. This film really was a let down. I would say it is more of a propaganda piece than anything else. If you always felt Bud Dwyer was innocent or were one of his supporters then this film may be enjoyable. No one can feel good about what Dwyer did in taking his own life but do not let that act cloud your own judgment when viewing the film. I can not recommend others view it.

Most of us watched this documentary for one reason, we saw Dwyer's suicide video and wanted to know what drove this man to do what he did. If I could sum Honest Man up in one word it would be poignant. At no time does the documentary try to sway you in his innocence or his guilt, which is the foundation of a good documentary, to present history without forcing you to believe what the documentarian believes. I think most of us are going to go into this with the outcome predetermined and we will see it the way we want to see it. I am not an emotional person but watching this documentary there were times that I felt something I'm not used to… sadness. Borrowed time, we are all on it, and Honest Man really shows us that not just Budd, and what went on in his life, but what could go on in any given day in ours. Many interviews in this documentary will stick with me. The only down side is there is very little of Budd himself talking. On the DVD there are a few swearing ins and a little bit of his final speech, in the extras, but what we learn of Budd comes from the memories of others and not his own words. Just to set the record straight the final speech was NOT aired live, it was rebroadcast. Who would care to watch the assumed resignation of a state treasurer live? Yes, kids were off of school that day but they did not see it live!