I am unsure of what the greater tragedy is: a man losing over ten years of his life for a crime he didn’t commit (and very nearly being executed for said offense), or the fact “documentaries” such as Fahrenheit 9/11 enjoy more commercial success than the excellent Errol Morris work The Thin Blue Line. On the surface, the former may seem far worse than the latter, but consider that it’s so-called journalism like that found in F 9/11 that colors false perceptions of reality and bears blame for guys...like Line’s Randall Adams staying incarcerated and unnoticed for over ten years. (I’m dealing in principles here, of course.) But when the impact of the media and its devotion to crap before truth is considered, the success of Moore’s film to Morris’s is disturbing – even frightening. And while Morris’s documentary was released in 1988, it still holds relevance today. I need to think only of the state trooper in Arkansas, who will probably get off Scott-free for murdering an unarmed mentally handicapped boy because he “thought” he was an escaped convict from Michigan – despite the fact that one brief comparison of photos calls to the contrary. People don’t like to admit the authorities watching over them at night are capable of the atrocious behavior presented in Morris’s documentary. And it’s that kind of indifference and lack of caring for facts that allow people like Adams to experience injustice to the extent he did from 1976 to 1988, as detailed in the film.

The Thin Blue Line played a large role in Adams’ eventual release. In the world of documentaries, that would make it the go-getter brother that rises from obscurity to achieve great things. F 9/11, much like its director, is the big fat disgusting slug that does nothing, but finds more favor with Mom and Dad because he refuses to get a job and move out of the house, thus delaying Empty Nest Syndrome, where they actually have to face the reality of life instead of the fantasy. With that said, I think Line fails on one front. Morris wants this to be an argument against the death penalty, but it isn’t. An argument against injustice perpetrated by the system? An argument against police and judicial corruption? An argument against quack doctors and faulty eyewitness testimony? Yes, on all counts. But to say the death penalty should be abolished for what Adams endures is like saying we should stop sending people to jail for fear of locking up the wrong guy. No, Line is effective and expertly crafted, but it’s more about questioning authority than altering punishment.