"Jasper, Texas" recounts the events surrounding the horrible killing-by-dragging of a black man by three white men near the title town which shocked America in 1998. This Showtime product exercises restraint in exploiting and sensationalizing the tragic crime while focusing on a small town trying to cope with finding itself at the center of national attention as media, FBI, Black Panthers, and the KKK converge on it. Voight and Gossett turn in solid performances as the town's Sheriff and Mayor respectively in this thin story with little extraordinary drama beyond the headlines. Somewhat weak as a stand-alone feature, "Jasper, Texas" will play best for those with a particular interest in the infamous Jasper story. (B-)
16 Reviews
Racism on two sides of Texas
lastliberal8 February 2008
Texas is a big, big state. There is plenty of room for racism to exist in any places at once. In 1998, there were two big incidents that made national headlines.
Near the Louisiana border, in Jasper, Texas. James Byrd was being drug to his death by three white men out for a good time. 600 miles away, near the New Mexico border, in Tulia, Texas, the sheriff hired Tome Coleman to combat his town's perceived drug problem. As the trials went on in Jasper, a pre-dawn raid rounded up 46 black men in Tulia and they were sentenced to 750 years in prison on trumped-up charges.
We will have to wait until Halle Berry has her baby to see the completion of Tulia, but we can watch the crimes in Jasper, now.
Louis Gossett Jr. plays the Mayor of Jasper, and Jon Voight is the Sheriff. They have to deal with the impact of the crime and the trial on a town of 8,000. They are not only ill prepared to investigate such a heinous murder, but they have to deal with the Black Panthers, who arrive to march armed (legal in Texas), and the KKK. I cannot think of two actors who were better suited for the parts, and could have played them better.
The overall message of the film is that these three men were not representative of the town - that blacks and whites got along. The truth was laid bare during the trial. They got along because the black citizens did not make waves. There was an undercurrent of racism throughout the community and it took an incident like this to get the town to look at it.
It is a shame that it took a death to make things better, but James Byrd did have what is hopefully a lasting legacy on the town.
Near the Louisiana border, in Jasper, Texas. James Byrd was being drug to his death by three white men out for a good time. 600 miles away, near the New Mexico border, in Tulia, Texas, the sheriff hired Tome Coleman to combat his town's perceived drug problem. As the trials went on in Jasper, a pre-dawn raid rounded up 46 black men in Tulia and they were sentenced to 750 years in prison on trumped-up charges.
We will have to wait until Halle Berry has her baby to see the completion of Tulia, but we can watch the crimes in Jasper, now.
Louis Gossett Jr. plays the Mayor of Jasper, and Jon Voight is the Sheriff. They have to deal with the impact of the crime and the trial on a town of 8,000. They are not only ill prepared to investigate such a heinous murder, but they have to deal with the Black Panthers, who arrive to march armed (legal in Texas), and the KKK. I cannot think of two actors who were better suited for the parts, and could have played them better.
The overall message of the film is that these three men were not representative of the town - that blacks and whites got along. The truth was laid bare during the trial. They got along because the black citizens did not make waves. There was an undercurrent of racism throughout the community and it took an incident like this to get the town to look at it.
It is a shame that it took a death to make things better, but James Byrd did have what is hopefully a lasting legacy on the town.
Great Movie!
tailgater-5897624 October 2019
This is one to watch again. Jon Voight carries this film with his offbeat character and does not disappoint. A tragic tale that exposes what all know is already there. Racism. I have never written a review before but I was compelled by this movie to create an account just to have a say. Could have been more focused on the victim and his story. Good job on the atmosphere in this. Gritty Texas with all the warts and open sores.
Horrible Incident, Decent Movie
actionpro7 August 2003
What a horrible incident! I don't agree with my state's (over)use of the death penalty, but somehow, I'm just fine with the fact that the perpetrators of this crime are going to get the death juice in a few years. The movie portrayal of the incident is sensitive and well-done. Louis Gossett, Jr. is awesome in this movie, which is an added bonus. I had an opportunity to be in the same room as R.C. Horn (long story), and he's almost a dead-ringer for Louis Gossett, Jr. Anyway, a great movie about a horrible incident.
Passage at the end
aspie-andy3 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
A couple of weeks' ago I had watched this film on one of the True Movies channels. And I remember at the end of the film there was a passage that said something more or less like;
"This was the first time a white man faced the death penalty for killing a black man since 1851 or some of year, I can't quite remember. And that at that time it was because a farmer had killed a slave of another farmer, and that it was no race issue but a property issue."
It sickens me how those people back then just thought that black people were disposable commodities, or less than human. Another example is how when the US constitution was first established, it stated that a slave was considered three fifths of a man. Look up the Three Fifths Compromise to know what I'm referring to.
"This was the first time a white man faced the death penalty for killing a black man since 1851 or some of year, I can't quite remember. And that at that time it was because a farmer had killed a slave of another farmer, and that it was no race issue but a property issue."
It sickens me how those people back then just thought that black people were disposable commodities, or less than human. Another example is how when the US constitution was first established, it stated that a slave was considered three fifths of a man. Look up the Three Fifths Compromise to know what I'm referring to.
Race themed
fmwongmd11 February 2020
Caution: Social Change Ahead
rmax3048236 August 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Anyone looking for a typical true-crime drama with suspenseful courtroom scenes -- the kind of thing that premium TV channels do fairly effectively -- won't find it here. This is a low-key, sometimes leisurely look at racial relationships in a small Texas town in 1998.
The crime, which was true enough, is utterly horrifying: a black man dragged for no reason for miles behind a speeding pick-up truck by three young white men.
So the movie is not a mystery. It's not a courtroom drama either. The scenes in court are rather quickly done. Instead we have John Voight as the slow-moving thoughtful county sheriff and Lou Gossett, Jr., as the nervous mayor of Jasper. The film deals with how the crime brings to the surface of this ostensibly placid little community the racial tensions that exist in its emotional infrastructure. The tensions are symbolized by a broken-down weed-covered wire fence that segregates the cemetery into black and white areas.
"We've got good folk here," says Gossett, looking out his office window. And indeed the police chief is white and the mayor and many members of the city council black, and law enforcement is thoroughly desegregated, and everyone is polite and friendly to one another. But the murder confuses everyone, mixes things up in an unpleasant way, generates ideas that make people uncomfortable, prompts them to say things and to behave in ways that they otherwise would not have done.
But everything is okay in Jasper, Texas, say the residents, while Byrd, the victim, is being buried in the black section of the cemetery. Frantic journalists come and the black panthers descend upon the town, fully armed, followed by the KKK. After all this has gone down, the town council, the mayor, the sheriff, and their families are having dinner al fresco with candles guttering in the breeze. Everyone is puzzled about what is going on. And in an attempt at reasoned discourse, both the blacks and the white people reveal prejudices that had no one seems to have been aware of, either in themselves or the other parties, or at any rate had never acknowledged. The dinner scene ends with Voight and Gossett sitting across the table from each other -- neither of them angry, both of them bemused and sad.
You can see through the rusty wire fence, half hidden by vines, but it's still there. No easy answers are offered. None are possible. It isn't simply a white problem. It's a problem for blacks too, a population in which what was once a defensive solidarity has come to take on a function of its own. And it's a problem over much of the world. Take a look at Rwanda ten years ago. Or the "ethnic cleansing" in the former Yugoslavia. This is one tough nut to crack, as the movie acknowledges, although there is no question but that this outbreak was "started" by a couple of renegade Aryan supremacists. Does the movie end happily? Surprisingly -- for a Hallmark Production -- the answer is a firm "yes and no." The wire fence is torn down, the murderer convicted and sentenced to death. (The first time a white man has been condemned for killing a black man in Texas since 1854 in a case which was a dispute over who the slave belonged to.) Yet, at the end, Gossett has lost his pension and is out of office.
There's craftsmanship evident in this film. The writing isn't bad. Neither are the performances. One scene is particularly poignant. During the trial we have seen the father of the murderer seated in court, a stereotypical redneck cracker peckerwood with a creased mean-looking face, in a wheelchair with cannulae in his nose, his expression a sort of fixed glower. The victim's father is in court too. An overweight sodden-seeming black man with very dark skin and a sad face. When the trial is over, the son sentenced, and everyone has left the court except these two men, the old white guy wheels himself over and pauses in front of the black guy. We expect a confrontation, but we don't get it. The father of the white murderer apologizes abjectly and clumsily to the father of the black victim, saying, "I don't know how I could of raised a boy like that." The old black man grasps his arm lightly and replies, "It ain't your fault. We're just two people who lost our boys." It's a touching moment.
The director seems to need more seasoning. There are violent inserts, several seconds each, of the victim being dragged behind the truck, screaming, the screen red and black. It's as if someone had thought to throw them in because the story needed juicing up. But the scenes are more distracting than shocking; they interrupt the flow of what is a fairly good film. And the lighting needed more thought than it was given. Why should a courtroom be so poorly lighted that we can barely make out the faces of the spectators, even in close up? The score fits the rest of the film, and the location shooting, which I take to be Canadian, is unevocative. These problems aside, this is a rather intelligent treatment of a fairly complicated problem, pinned down as America's Great Social Divide by Gunnar Myrdal and others long ago. We can always end a war, one way or another, but pulling down that wire fence is a much more difficult job.
The crime, which was true enough, is utterly horrifying: a black man dragged for no reason for miles behind a speeding pick-up truck by three young white men.
So the movie is not a mystery. It's not a courtroom drama either. The scenes in court are rather quickly done. Instead we have John Voight as the slow-moving thoughtful county sheriff and Lou Gossett, Jr., as the nervous mayor of Jasper. The film deals with how the crime brings to the surface of this ostensibly placid little community the racial tensions that exist in its emotional infrastructure. The tensions are symbolized by a broken-down weed-covered wire fence that segregates the cemetery into black and white areas.
"We've got good folk here," says Gossett, looking out his office window. And indeed the police chief is white and the mayor and many members of the city council black, and law enforcement is thoroughly desegregated, and everyone is polite and friendly to one another. But the murder confuses everyone, mixes things up in an unpleasant way, generates ideas that make people uncomfortable, prompts them to say things and to behave in ways that they otherwise would not have done.
But everything is okay in Jasper, Texas, say the residents, while Byrd, the victim, is being buried in the black section of the cemetery. Frantic journalists come and the black panthers descend upon the town, fully armed, followed by the KKK. After all this has gone down, the town council, the mayor, the sheriff, and their families are having dinner al fresco with candles guttering in the breeze. Everyone is puzzled about what is going on. And in an attempt at reasoned discourse, both the blacks and the white people reveal prejudices that had no one seems to have been aware of, either in themselves or the other parties, or at any rate had never acknowledged. The dinner scene ends with Voight and Gossett sitting across the table from each other -- neither of them angry, both of them bemused and sad.
You can see through the rusty wire fence, half hidden by vines, but it's still there. No easy answers are offered. None are possible. It isn't simply a white problem. It's a problem for blacks too, a population in which what was once a defensive solidarity has come to take on a function of its own. And it's a problem over much of the world. Take a look at Rwanda ten years ago. Or the "ethnic cleansing" in the former Yugoslavia. This is one tough nut to crack, as the movie acknowledges, although there is no question but that this outbreak was "started" by a couple of renegade Aryan supremacists. Does the movie end happily? Surprisingly -- for a Hallmark Production -- the answer is a firm "yes and no." The wire fence is torn down, the murderer convicted and sentenced to death. (The first time a white man has been condemned for killing a black man in Texas since 1854 in a case which was a dispute over who the slave belonged to.) Yet, at the end, Gossett has lost his pension and is out of office.
There's craftsmanship evident in this film. The writing isn't bad. Neither are the performances. One scene is particularly poignant. During the trial we have seen the father of the murderer seated in court, a stereotypical redneck cracker peckerwood with a creased mean-looking face, in a wheelchair with cannulae in his nose, his expression a sort of fixed glower. The victim's father is in court too. An overweight sodden-seeming black man with very dark skin and a sad face. When the trial is over, the son sentenced, and everyone has left the court except these two men, the old white guy wheels himself over and pauses in front of the black guy. We expect a confrontation, but we don't get it. The father of the white murderer apologizes abjectly and clumsily to the father of the black victim, saying, "I don't know how I could of raised a boy like that." The old black man grasps his arm lightly and replies, "It ain't your fault. We're just two people who lost our boys." It's a touching moment.
The director seems to need more seasoning. There are violent inserts, several seconds each, of the victim being dragged behind the truck, screaming, the screen red and black. It's as if someone had thought to throw them in because the story needed juicing up. But the scenes are more distracting than shocking; they interrupt the flow of what is a fairly good film. And the lighting needed more thought than it was given. Why should a courtroom be so poorly lighted that we can barely make out the faces of the spectators, even in close up? The score fits the rest of the film, and the location shooting, which I take to be Canadian, is unevocative. These problems aside, this is a rather intelligent treatment of a fairly complicated problem, pinned down as America's Great Social Divide by Gunnar Myrdal and others long ago. We can always end a war, one way or another, but pulling down that wire fence is a much more difficult job.
Sociology 101
Lechuguilla6 July 2005
In 1998 three young White men killed James Byrd, Jr., a Black man, by chaining Byrd to the back of their pickup truck, and then driving away at high speed down a back road in rural deep East Texas. It was a horrible crime, one that was quickly and easily solved. This film tells the story of that real-life event ... sort of.
The best part of "Jasper, Texas" is the performance of Jon Voight, as sheriff Billy Rowles, who investigated the crime. The film also presents a credibly downbeat atmosphere of rural eastern Texas.
That said, I was disappointed with the screenplay. The story begins on the day after the killing and, except for occasional flashbacks, moves forward, to chronicle the aftermath of the event, from the viewpoint of the town's residents. What was a terrible personal tragedy is turned into a speech-athon on race relations from: local politicians, the FBI, a citizen's task force, the Black Panthers, a White supremacy group, and others. The film's cast is way too large, and the dialogue is inflated. And throughout this talky film, there's the usual obnoxious behavior of the vulturous news media.
We never really get to know James Byrd, Jr., ... the victim. He is almost irrelevant. Nor do we get any insight into the motivations of the three killers. The film thus mostly ignores the most relevant people, and chooses instead to tell the story of background people who talk endlessly around a sociology topic that has been talked to death. The entire film seemed academic, impersonal, and emotionally uninvolved.
The best part of "Jasper, Texas" is the performance of Jon Voight, as sheriff Billy Rowles, who investigated the crime. The film also presents a credibly downbeat atmosphere of rural eastern Texas.
That said, I was disappointed with the screenplay. The story begins on the day after the killing and, except for occasional flashbacks, moves forward, to chronicle the aftermath of the event, from the viewpoint of the town's residents. What was a terrible personal tragedy is turned into a speech-athon on race relations from: local politicians, the FBI, a citizen's task force, the Black Panthers, a White supremacy group, and others. The film's cast is way too large, and the dialogue is inflated. And throughout this talky film, there's the usual obnoxious behavior of the vulturous news media.
We never really get to know James Byrd, Jr., ... the victim. He is almost irrelevant. Nor do we get any insight into the motivations of the three killers. The film thus mostly ignores the most relevant people, and chooses instead to tell the story of background people who talk endlessly around a sociology topic that has been talked to death. The entire film seemed academic, impersonal, and emotionally uninvolved.
A reminder that more racism is not the answer to racism.
Anonymous_Maxine17 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
In the movie, it is stated that the Bible says "An eye for an eye." There is, first of all, the old saying that an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind, but I think a more important concern is that an eye for an eye being applied in this case would lead to three "death by dragging" convictions. That would be a pretty bad publicity stunt, to put it mildly, even though the three men who would do something like that to someone do not deserve to live. My thought during the movie was that George W. Bush was the governor at the time, and he famously stated that he gave an average of 15 minutes of consideration to each case before approving a death sentence.
Jasper, Texas is a brilliant TV movie about the horrendous dragging death of James Byrd in 1998, as well as the staggering ineptitude of the government, brought on by conflicting policies. The movie, for example, certainly doesn't believe in the boundlessness of the Second Amendment. There are extensive scenes where the immediately likable but barely literate town sheriff, played brilliantly by Jon Voigt, struggles to convince the Black Panthers not to bring guns to their demonstration outside the courthouse, but is rendered powerless by their right to bear arms.
True, they have the right to bear arms, but do they have the right to incite violence? To instigate a riot? These are both avenues by which the sheriff could have forbidden them by law from appearing armed in front of the courthouse, but chose to ignore them or was unaware that he had the power to stop people from inciting violence, an intention which the Black Panthers and KKK made no effort to hide. The Black Panthers plan a demonstration outside the courthouse to rival the KKK, a group of backward lunatics who also organized a demonstration. I didn't even know the KKK still existed, this is a group whose beliefs are so absolutely archaic that it is indeed heartbreaking to know that there are still people in this very country, in the 21st century, who still adhere to them. It's pathetic. But the Black Panthers, as this movie shows, are no less racist than the KKK.
The trial scenes in the film are great, although we only see the trial of one of the three men involved in the murder, and at one point the dirtbag defense attorney objects, saying that no chain has been introduced as evidence. I would have thought that he would have been well aware of the fate of the chain used to kill James Byrd, at least from the prosecuting attorney, since both sides are required by law to reveal to the other side the details of their respective cases. Also, in one scene, as a friend of the murderer reads to the court a letter that he wrote her in which he says "white is right," he mouths the words along with her and then grins, proud of his racist wit but apparently unaware that he is helping to cement his conviction. We didn't need that. We know the guy's guilty.
The movie makes it very clear, however, that it is the media that creates the real trouble with things like this. There is one reporter who would constantly ask questions designed to make the interviewee uncomfortable of back them into a corner. Every time this woman opened her mouth I wished someone would take that microphone and shove it in. It's an interesting parallel that blacks and whites work together on this case and are friends with each other outside of work, but the people that they represent seem completely divided. In one scene, however, we learn that racism exists on all levels, and the movie ends with a sign that racism will go on. It's odd that there is all of this talk about whether or not the town is a racist town, which might be hard to prove even given the heinous murder that took place went unpunished since the town has a black mayor. Although the trial resulted in the right decision, it is clear at the end of the movie that the race situation might be worse off than it was before. I like to think that the human race is headed in the right direction, though.
Jasper, Texas is a brilliant TV movie about the horrendous dragging death of James Byrd in 1998, as well as the staggering ineptitude of the government, brought on by conflicting policies. The movie, for example, certainly doesn't believe in the boundlessness of the Second Amendment. There are extensive scenes where the immediately likable but barely literate town sheriff, played brilliantly by Jon Voigt, struggles to convince the Black Panthers not to bring guns to their demonstration outside the courthouse, but is rendered powerless by their right to bear arms.
True, they have the right to bear arms, but do they have the right to incite violence? To instigate a riot? These are both avenues by which the sheriff could have forbidden them by law from appearing armed in front of the courthouse, but chose to ignore them or was unaware that he had the power to stop people from inciting violence, an intention which the Black Panthers and KKK made no effort to hide. The Black Panthers plan a demonstration outside the courthouse to rival the KKK, a group of backward lunatics who also organized a demonstration. I didn't even know the KKK still existed, this is a group whose beliefs are so absolutely archaic that it is indeed heartbreaking to know that there are still people in this very country, in the 21st century, who still adhere to them. It's pathetic. But the Black Panthers, as this movie shows, are no less racist than the KKK.
The trial scenes in the film are great, although we only see the trial of one of the three men involved in the murder, and at one point the dirtbag defense attorney objects, saying that no chain has been introduced as evidence. I would have thought that he would have been well aware of the fate of the chain used to kill James Byrd, at least from the prosecuting attorney, since both sides are required by law to reveal to the other side the details of their respective cases. Also, in one scene, as a friend of the murderer reads to the court a letter that he wrote her in which he says "white is right," he mouths the words along with her and then grins, proud of his racist wit but apparently unaware that he is helping to cement his conviction. We didn't need that. We know the guy's guilty.
The movie makes it very clear, however, that it is the media that creates the real trouble with things like this. There is one reporter who would constantly ask questions designed to make the interviewee uncomfortable of back them into a corner. Every time this woman opened her mouth I wished someone would take that microphone and shove it in. It's an interesting parallel that blacks and whites work together on this case and are friends with each other outside of work, but the people that they represent seem completely divided. In one scene, however, we learn that racism exists on all levels, and the movie ends with a sign that racism will go on. It's odd that there is all of this talk about whether or not the town is a racist town, which might be hard to prove even given the heinous murder that took place went unpunished since the town has a black mayor. Although the trial resulted in the right decision, it is clear at the end of the movie that the race situation might be worse off than it was before. I like to think that the human race is headed in the right direction, though.
Savage chains
Prismark104 November 2014
This is a kind of made for cable TV film that I can imagine was trailed every 15 minutes in the run up to its first showing. The shocking true story of the murder of James Byrd jr in 1998 when he was chained to the back of a pickup truck and dragged through the roads in Jasper, East Texas. Byrd was black and his murderers were three white men.
Obviously this was a horrific crime, the drama is interspersed with news footage of politicians commenting on this even including President Bill Clinton.
Jon Voight plays the considerate and wily Sheriff Billy Rowles who investigates the crime and finds the assailants rather quickly. Louis Gossett jr is the town mayor.
However we get to know little about the victim. Its rather hinted from early scenes that he had been a bad boy in the past and in other scenes it was alleged that he was a drug dealer. We also do not find out why the young guys decided to commit such a crime.
We see footage of the drag scenes in flashback, obviously the filmmakers decide to tread the line by not being too exploitative but there are some graphic scenes of the aftermath.
The film turns to the examination of how the events caused waves to the town, where racism was hidden and the events brought the media as well as the Black Panthers and the Ku Klux Klan into the town and turn it into a powder keg. We also have the case reaching the court as the men stand trial.
Yet this part of the story is rather uninteresting and perfunctory. Its very much highlights the flaws of these type of made for cable TV films. A shocking true event turned into a true movie of the week in a sanitized way. The budget is blown in getting the services of two Oscar winning actors but the production is sub par with lacklustre cinematography.
Obviously this was a horrific crime, the drama is interspersed with news footage of politicians commenting on this even including President Bill Clinton.
Jon Voight plays the considerate and wily Sheriff Billy Rowles who investigates the crime and finds the assailants rather quickly. Louis Gossett jr is the town mayor.
However we get to know little about the victim. Its rather hinted from early scenes that he had been a bad boy in the past and in other scenes it was alleged that he was a drug dealer. We also do not find out why the young guys decided to commit such a crime.
We see footage of the drag scenes in flashback, obviously the filmmakers decide to tread the line by not being too exploitative but there are some graphic scenes of the aftermath.
The film turns to the examination of how the events caused waves to the town, where racism was hidden and the events brought the media as well as the Black Panthers and the Ku Klux Klan into the town and turn it into a powder keg. We also have the case reaching the court as the men stand trial.
Yet this part of the story is rather uninteresting and perfunctory. Its very much highlights the flaws of these type of made for cable TV films. A shocking true event turned into a true movie of the week in a sanitized way. The budget is blown in getting the services of two Oscar winning actors but the production is sub par with lacklustre cinematography.
Plays like an R-rated Lifetime flick but not bad
SgPepr5 July 2003
Aside from the Lifetime comparison this is a pretty decent dramatization of the terrible crime in Jasper. Really believable performances by both Jon Voight (with quite a believable Southern accent, similar to Bill Clinton's) and Louis Gossett, Jr. This would probably have been much more intense as a major motion picture theatrical release, but it's worth checking out as it is. In a couple of brief scenes, the film interjects real news clips of Bill Clinton and others speaking about the incident.
Not accurate.
prospectboy0521 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I live in Jasper, Texas. I was born and raised here, and this was one inaccurate movie. I liked the cast of characters, but they definitely made the town look like a small hick town that is not current, and it is nothing like that. I thought that Jon Voight, and Louis Gossett Jr. gave great performances. I also didn't like the fact that they showed the dragging so violently. Many of us here were reminded of how horrible it was. It is behind us, and that is where we would like to keep it. Overall I did not enjoy this movie. I have seen it twice, and I really doubt that I will watch it again. I feel that many people would be greatly surprised if they ever came to Jasper. It is nothing like it is portrayed in this movie.
Tells The Story
twelve-house-books18 August 2022
Ever since 1998 when I was told the details of this murder just a few days after it happened, I have tried to piece together the story, but this film tells every angle well, but leaves us with the question of whether the two main perpetrators would be killed for their crimes or not. They were killed after all, the third man, who just went along for the ride, is in prison until 2038. Films like this are important because the Lost Cause Narrative is still being taught to children, and it has to stop. It, too, has to be put to death by a lethal injection of love and truth. By the way, the accents for the white people are not accurate.
I'm somewhat offended
romy24516 February 2004
I was a junior in high school when the true story behind Jasper occurred, but I don't remember much of it. Until I saw this movie, the horrific nature of the crime hadn't hit me, and I became disgusted with the racism that does still exist. While this was certainly no blockbuster, I found this movie meaningful and it really delivered a message to me.
Also, not to make light of the story, I'm from Deep East Texas, and I have NEVER heard anybody from the area use that Deep South accent. I agree that we do have a distinctive accent, but I am somewhat offended that somebody else could review this movie and say that the accent was actually authentic--that is as far from the truth as you can get. We don't talk like the characters on "In the Heat of the Night," we talk like rednecks--and to us, that's not an insult.
Also, not to make light of the story, I'm from Deep East Texas, and I have NEVER heard anybody from the area use that Deep South accent. I agree that we do have a distinctive accent, but I am somewhat offended that somebody else could review this movie and say that the accent was actually authentic--that is as far from the truth as you can get. We don't talk like the characters on "In the Heat of the Night," we talk like rednecks--and to us, that's not an insult.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
