Linkshoch Wonderful Movie

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

stretch0069 -this review was one I wrote in Dec 2003. my opinion hasn't changed- I watched Innocents Betrayed. I have to be blunt. I was not impressed. To me, it was more an anti-government film than a Pro-Gun film. All I saw was how governments in the last 100 years have killed people. I fail to see how arming those people could have made any difference what so ever. If the people do not have the will to resist, they won't, no matter what tools they have. There is a quote at the beginning of the film that goes something like those who do not remember the past are doomed to repeat it. Well, like it or not, its human nature to forget. Just look at the past. Go back further than 100 years. Mankind keeps making the same mistakes over and over. The hype of this film was that it would radically change people's minds about gun control. Well, it misses horribly. It gives quick snippets of death tolls from regimes in the last century. The impression I got was that I should fear my government. It just showed bad governments doing bad things and that they continue to do so throughout time. I got more out of the two interviews at the very end than I did from the film. Governments are something to fear. I don't care if you are armed or not. Once a government gets enough power, the people are doomed no matter what. Our government has gained too much power already. There are too many people in this country that either don't want to resist or who just don't care. Just look at the US population and compare it to the NRA membership. I wanted my parents to watch the film. They are from the mid-west. Lived there all their lives. Dad is upper 60s, Mom is middle 50s. They are neither pro or anti gun. They do not own any guns, but have accompanied me to the range and shot some of my smaller caliber weapons. To them, its not about exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights. Its about getting out of the house and doing something different. They could just as easily take a drive out in the country. Only my Mom watched the entire film. She almost fell asleep watching it. She thought it was more about how governments abuse their power than gun control. She made a comment about 9/11. "What difference would guns have made? The plane was taken over with box cutters. I would risk a few cuts and some spilled blood to save my life." On a technical note, the content was cheap and thin. The editing was worse than amateur. With the apparent resources they had, they could have made a much better film. Someone needs to go back and start putting in some cold hard facts. It needs better presentation so people won't fall asleep. My mother, who is no director, agreed about the presentation. I would have spent more time on facts about the results of gun control in the US. There were two good examples towards the end: the lady at Luby's in Texas and the Carpenter Family in California. These are two very good examples of how gun control kills. Why weren't they explored further?? Where was Ruby Ridge?? Where was Waco??? Plenty of examples that were not shown. Take my advice, don't waste the time or money. I am embarrassed by this film and will not show it to anyone else. The producers of this film need to go back to the drawing board and make something with REAL impact.

tsd5 As others have said, not your "standard movie" sort of thing. It's "The Killing Fields" without any attempt to sell it to Hollywood . . . The producers obviously did a lot of research into this one before the filming.I understand they do have some other films they've made, but I can't locate them on IMDb yet. I'll be watching for those to be added.Great film, though I do recommend you watch it first yourself before seeing if it's appropriate yet for your (younger) children."All of the Bill of Rights, for all Citizens!" indeed. I look forward to seeing more of their work, which seems to be heading towards being freely distributed ?

joshuak47 This movie first shows some incidents in foreign countries where people were massacred. It discusses how, in many of these incidents, the future victims' weapons were confiscated beforehand.Yet the video never tells how many weapons the underdogs forfeited. It also does not extrapolate on how much of a difference it would've made even if the victims WERE equipped with firearms during the massacre. Most of the victims were killed by soldiers: weapon experts. Even if the victims had weapons, they wouldn't defeat an army.One example was of a Chinese farming village versus the military. Another example was of Buddhist monks in Tibet (I've never heard that Buddhist monks WANT to go to war). And another in Uganda, where one tribe's weapons were confiscated and given to another tribe. What if neither tribe had weapons in the first place? We hear about the people killed in the Holocaust, that they were forced to forfeit their guns too. But I doubt that very many of the Jews/Gypsies owned guns. It's the movie's responsibility to tell me those numbers. It also talks about Japanese-Americans who were placed in concentration camps in the US during WW2. The filmmakers probably don't realize it, but they were implying that Japanese-Americans would have had a better outcome had they drawn weapons on the American military, instead of going peacefully to the camps.They also argue that you should be allowed to bring guns into family restaurants (citing a single incident in which 23 people were killed in a cafeteria). And they are against gun locks, describing a SINGLE incident in which TWO kids were killed by an intruder. They also boldly imply that people should be allowed to bring guns on planes, and that 9/11 could have been prevented if people were allowed to bring guns on planes. In this part, though, they use no narration, just flashing text and pictures. If they had said anything, it would have been such a ridiculous statement, so they chose not to talk instead.They also don't explain why the US had 13,000 murders in 1998-2000, while Japan had 637 and the UK had 850 (www.nationmaster.com). The latter two nations don't allow its citizens to normally purchase guns.I give it a 3 because it taught me a little about foreign genocide, and it was short.

Anonymous781 Unless you are into politics and history, you won't really 'want' to see this movie like it is any other film.. treat it like what it is - a documentary. It is a very important documentary, because people must learn about what happened in the past, so they can prevent recurrences of past tragedies in the future. It is important that people see this movie so that they are more educated, and aware of the significance of the gun debate. Gun rights and the 2nd amendment isn't about hunting or sportsmen, although those are both perfectly legitimate activities. The real purpose behind the 2nd amendment gets discussed in this movie, and the film will reveal to any intelligent person who enjoys history and understands why it is important why gun control must be rejected.